| ▲ | Fnoord 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
Cygwin is way older than CoLinux. CoLinux is from 2004. Cygwin was first released in 1995. The problem with Cygwin as I remember it was DLL hell. You'd have applications (such as a OpenSSH port for Windows) which would include their own cygwin1.dll and then you'd have issues with different versions of said DLL. Cygwin had less overhead which mattered in a world of limited RAM and heavy, limited swapping (x86-32, limited I/O, PATA, ...). Those constraints also meant native applications instead of Web 2.0 NodeJS and what not. Java specifically had a bad name, and back then not even a coherent UI toolkit. As always: two steps forward, one step back. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | toast0 8 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> Java specifically had a bad name, and back then not even a coherent UI toolkit. Java was ahead of its time, now nothing has a coherent UI toolkit. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | barrkel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Just use ssh from Cygwin. DLL hell was rarely a problem, just always install everything via setup.exe. The single biggest problem it has is slow forking. I learned to write my scripts in pure bash as much as possible, or as a composition of streaming executables, and avoid executing an executable per line of input or similar. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | johnmaguire 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> Cygwin had less overhead which mattered in a world of limited RAM and heavy, limited swapping (x86-32, limited I/O, PATA, ...). Maybe so, but my memory of Cygwin was waiting multiple seconds just for the Cygwin CLI prompt to load. It was very slow on my machines. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | pjmlp 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Meanwhile those that complained about Java, now ship a whole browser with their "native" application, and then complain about Google taking over the Web. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||