I use the damn thing every day. Believe me, WNT is not the knock-off of VMS that the Windows people would like to have you think.

Some internal structures have similar names, there are architectural similarities, and that's about it. I am reliably informed that the programming point of view is completely different, too.

This article, on a Windows fanboi website, written by a (admittedly very talented) fanboi, is trying to talk up the reliability of Windows NT by appealing to the VMS heritage.

Worked on you :-)

I mean, for goodness' sake. Look at Table 2, Significant VMS and Windows NT Similarities. You could add a third column and put in $UNIX and then appeal to Solaris' reliability!

Example fragment:

"Both NT and VMS rely heavily on memory-mapped files, especially for mapping the code for executing applications and implementing copy-on-write functionality (because of VAX hardware limitations, VMS provides less efficient copy on demand funtionality). Physical memory management in NT and VMS relies on demand-paged virtual memory."

Now s/VMS/Linux/ (and ditch the bit about VAX)

(Also, what a mingingly shit web page - doesn't render even approximately right in Gecko-based browsers)