digg

Excellent! Great article that cleared up my misconceptions. I can now quell my fear of being knifed at a LAN party!

IMO that analogy isn't accurate enough. There are many flavours of UNIX, some arguable much better. These include Solaris and System V. No one uses DOS anymore in a corporate environment but many people still use UNIX. UNIX has a GUI FYI!

Unix is an operating System start was written in 1969. Just like most people say an operating system comprises of a Kernel and some user based tools, Unix consists of a kernel and some simple tools like sh (shell) and cc (c compiler). Then Stallman wanted Free Software so he started to replace all the UNIX tools with free alternatives starting with these userland tools. Those replacements included gcc (GNU C Compiler) and BASH (Bourne Again Shell). These tools were written for the UNIX Kernel. Then Linux, not acting as a part of the GNU team wrote Linux, a replacement for the UNIX kernel. Then people who wanted a free UNIX ran the GNU tools and the Linux Kernel to create a complete OS replacement.

History aside it's worth noting that UNIX is still here and the GNU toolkit still runs against it. Nexenta (http://www.nexenta.org/os) is a flavour of UNIX that looks and feels just like Ubuntu. It has a copy of X, a copy of gnome, the GNU C Compiler but has a kernel based on Solaris (which is a version of Unix).

I think this pretty picture does the history much more justice: http://www.netneurotic.net/mac/unix/images/UNIX.pn ...

If I was writing an article to submit to digg however (rather than just a comment) I would have provided references for my material.

analogy should also read
unix is to linux
as
dos is to windows
or rather
bash is to unix

This blog is wrong on so many facts. Why is this being digged when it's full of misinformation? Read Philluminati's post as he has more correct info than the actual blog.
His analogy of DOS and Unix doesn't make sense. If you're new to linux, don't remember that analogy as it's just wrong. Linux isn't a unix-variant it's unix-like. It's just a kernel that uses GNU which stands for Gnu's Not Unix. There's other stuff he got wrong, so I'd suggest forgetting everything you just learned from it...if you did.

Great article. I may have to rethink my whole "I'm too damn good to use Linux" stance. ;-)

this article is awful and wrong

Ummm ... Linux vs. UNIX semantics is a topic that's not only been beaten to death, it's largely forgotten. This article would have been interesting in 2000/2001 when having a "Linux strategy" was the new hot thing in VC Land.