undefined | Better HN

0 pointstlb6y ago0 comments

He's talking about research, so you have to look at the state of the art, not what the masses were still using. In 2000 I used FreeBSD, which was pretty good. It had jails [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeBSD_jail] by then, which a reasonable person might still prefer to modern Linux containers.

0 comments

kllrnohj6y ago

Windows 2000 also existed at that time, was widely used, and was basically straight out of the future. It had:

NTFS 3.0 with file encryption support

Logical disk management for dynamic disks & expansion of a logical partition over multiple physical disks. Without a reformat.

Distributed file systems & hierarchical storage management.

MMC with group policy control, active directory, centralized event viewer for OS & application events, and system service management

Speaking of which, system services were a thing that actually existed and were managed (systemd fighting still continues, so Linux still hasn't "caught up" on this)

Plug & Play ACPI support (technically windows 98 was the first to support this but it was so broken it was a joke - Linux lagged by a few years and didn't really support it until 2.6).

User-mode print drivers

Network QoS

time service with SNTP support

cperciva6y ago

We had jails, but we didn't have virtualized network stacks, pluggable TCP congestion frameworks, or bhyve.

feanaro6y ago

FreeBSD jails have certainly not be a static concept since 2000, so the term "FreeBSD jail" does not denote a single, unchanged thing.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse