Re: A dumb, somewhat off-topic question...

[shaleh@clifford.livenet.net]

> 
> I've checked the FAQs, and I can't seem to find a good answer to this: why
> is Linux not refered to as a flavor of Unix?  On Linux.Org, it's referred to
> as "Unix-like",  and this hedging seems pretty universal.  Is there some
> Unix standard that Linux does not adhere to.  Is there some licensing
> organization that expects someone to pony up some dough before they can say,
> "Unix(TM)" (but if that's it, who paid for FreeBSD?)  In my experience,
> Linux is no more different from any particular flavor of Unix than Solaris
> is from AIX, or whatever - is there some important difference I'm missing?
> 

Yes, UNIX is a owned name we would have to pay to use the name and pass tests.