A COMPARISON OF OS/2 AND LINUX

When computers were the nearexclusive domain of scientists and engineers, most computer users were familiar with the structure and characteristics of their operating systems, which varied from manufacturer to manufacturer. As personal computers gained a wider audience of nonscientific users, and as technology advanced to third and fourthgeneration programming languages that require less specialized knowledge, the relationship between the end user and the operating system has grown less direct. Advances in operating systems continue to be made, and today, Microsoft Windows dominates the personal computer market, with Apple machines running a proprietary operating system. However, two other operating systems, OS/2 and Linux also maintain a small market share, and OS/2 has a joint history with Windows. This research compares and contrasts OS/2 and Linux, including their future potential.

COMPARISON OF AND CONTRASTS BETWEEN OS/2 AND LINUX

. . .
mble interfaces that Windows or OS/2 users would recognize (Kiertzner 22). ENVIRONMENT Linux and OS/2 both support multi-tasking and multi-user environments, and have since early in their development (Thompson 1). Multi-tasking is important since it provides the ability for the computer to work on more than one task at one time; during the earliest days of computers, they had to complete one task before another could be started. Multi-user environments have become increasingly important as networks--even home networks--have become commonplace and the client-server environment has replaced the standalone personal computer at home and in the office. RESPONSIBILITIES OS/2 memory management comes in part from its integration of symmetric multi-processing (SMP). Applications that do not rely on custom device drivers or kernel-level code sequences can make use of SMP, which greatly enhances processing. Specifically, SMP works in environments where there are multiple processors running by ensuring that the various processors have the information necessary, and the traffic management required, to prevent data collision (Waldron 1). In Linux, memory management incorporates automatic storage allocation and the swapping of data be
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
OPERATING SYSTEMS, Specifically SMP, REAL-TIME OS/2, COMPONENTS OS/2, Retrieved Internet, Linux OS/2, Red Hat, SYSTEMS OS/2, POTENTIAL OS/2, OS/2 Linux, operating system, retrieved internet 19, operating systems, 19 nov 2003, 19 nov, internet 19 nov, internet 19, nov 2003, retrieved internet, os/2 linux, batch processing, windows os/2, market share, contrasts os/2 linux, np retrieved internet,
Approximate Word count = 1316
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)