On Monday, February 23, 2004, at 04:22 PM, Stroller wrote: > > On Feb 23, 2004, at 4:02 pm, William H. Magill wrote: > > Both client & server versions of OS X are exactly the same under the > hood - a much better analogy is that they are both the same make & > type of car, except that OS X server has the higher-end "trim" & > "options" for more demanding drivers. i mostly agree here... > > If OS X server is a general-purpose, multi-user, time-sharing, Unix > system, then so is OS X client - as I understand it the only > difference between the two is a few GUI admin goodies. I do agree that > is a reasonable expectation that most workstation- and domestic-users > would have no need to add more than 99 users, I am the ONLY user of TWO of my macs on my network... i have SEVERAL users - but not human users... a 'user' is not always a human being... i have several 'users' that are merely different operating environments... some are there merely because a particular service needs to have it's own 'user'... I seem to remember them pushing the idea that OS X client was 'rock solid unix' under the hood... not a partial implementation... Is the Kernel licensed under an open-source type agreement? Which parts of OS X are 'open source' and which parts are based on 'free' (so to speak) Unix or public BSD or whatever? __ http://etyrnal.no-ip.com .__ ____ _/ |_ ___.__. _______ ____ _____ | | _/ __ \ \ __\ < | | \_ __ \ / \ \__ \ | | \ ___/ | | \___ | | | \/ | | \ / __ \_ | |__ \___ > |__| / ____| |__| |___| / (____ / |____/ \/ \/ \/ \/