text:
Worms World Party

Worms World Party is a 2001 artillery turn-based tactics video game developed by Team17, and is the sequel to Worms Armageddon in the Worms series. As with the previous games in the series, players take turns controlling their teams and using available projectiles, firearms, explosives, and equipment to destroy all opposing teams and manoeuvre across a specified and highly destructible map.

Although fairly well received upon release, the overall reception of Worms World Party has subsequently become mixed amongst the Worms community. Some found it to be an improvement to an already good game, whilst others saw it as being too derivative of its predecessor and not worthwhile for Worms Armageddon players. Worms World Party was the last two-dimensional title in the main series before transitioning to 3D graphics, with Worms 3D as the first fully 3D Worms title.

Gameplay
Like its predecessors, Worms World Party is a side-scrolling video game involving controlling a team of worms and using a collection of weaponry to eliminate any opposing teams. The worms can walk and jump around and use tools such as the ninja rope and parachute to move to otherwise unreachable locations.

The worms have an arsenal of dozens of weapons, ranging from longbows to bazookas and from fireball to Holy Hand Grenades. There are also an array of special weapons, such as Armageddon (meteor shower) or the infamous Concrete Donkey. Some of these weapons are present in the worms' initial arsenal while others can be collected from randomly appearing crates during the game. For some weapons, such as grenades, holding the launching key longer shoots them further. The landscape can be deformed with any weapon, forcing the players to adapt to changing environments. Also, in addition to the nature-made obstacles, the maps may contain land mines which explode when a worm comes close to one, and barrels which explode when shot, spreading out some burning napalm. These often lead to very technical combinations where, for example, a worm is first hit with a grenade and is then thrown against a mine which sets off another worm, which hits a third worm who slips into the water.

The image illustrates a match between three teams of worms in a pirate-themed map. Over their heads the worms have their names and hit points. The colour of the text indicates the team the worm belongs to. Each team can be customized by the player's will, including the language the worms speak and the headstone that is left when a worm dies. The worms can also be drowned, in which case no headstone is left. In the bottom of the screen the remaining time and the wind speed are shown. When the time runs out, the water level starts to raise on each turn, drowning the worms at the lowest points of the map (this is called Sudden Death). The wind speed affects some weapons. Failing to account for it may turn a missile back into the worm who launched it.

The player can play against the computer, or can play against people on the same computer or over the Internet or local area network (TCP/IP and IPX supported).

The player can set up many options and make maps one can play on prior to battle to tailor the experience. There are also single-player and multiplayer missions available to help refine the player's skills with the various weapons and utilities.

Development
After releasing Worms Armageddon, Team17 had plans to develop a fully three-dimensional iteration of Worms, resulting in the 2003 launch of Worms 3D. Worms Armageddon was meant to be the final game in the series using two-dimensional visuals, but Sega approached the company and asked them to develop an online version for the Dreamcast. Worms World Party is the first Worms game in which Andy Davidson, the franchise's creator, had no involvement since his departure from Team17 (Davidson later returned to the company in 2012).

Worms World Party was ported to Pocket PCs by JAMDAT Mobile on 3 October 2003. There was a port due to launch on the Gizmondo platform, but that was ultimately cancelled because of the console's short lifespan.

Worms World Party Remastered
A remaster of the game, Worms World Party Remastered, was released to Steam and GOG.com on July 16, 2015. The game is "remastered in 1080p and at 60fps", with new sound effects.

Reception
The Dreamcast, PC, Game Boy Advance and N-Gage versions received "generally favourable reviews" according to the review aggregation website Metacritic. The main complaint in the individual reviews is that the game was too similar to Worms Armageddon with merely incremental improvements. Mike Wolf of NextGen said of the Dreamcast version, "Even with the online issues, this is Worms at its finest – quick, easy, fun worm-blasting action." Miss Spell of GamePro said of the same console version, "While true to the series, the simple 2D graphics don't push the Dreamcast's capabilities. The heroic music and the comic voices are the best part of the game, which isn't saying much. All in all, you'll want to let this one off the hook." Edge called the same Dreamcast version "a purchase that can't be justified if you only plan to experience the oneplayer [sic] side."

The PC version received a "Silver" sales award from the Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association (ELSPA), indicating sales of at least 100,000 units in the UK.

The same PC version was ranked Nos. 30, 70, and 94 of PC PowerPlay's top 100 PC games of all time in 2001, 2003, and 2004, respectively. It was voted by about 1.22 million gamers as the second runner-up for the Mobile Game of the Year in the Golden Joystick Awards 2009. Pocket Gamer retrospectively listed the port for N-Gage versions 1.0 and 2.0 as one of the twenty best games for the gaming phone.

title: Worms World Party


text:
Trajan's Dacian Wars

Trajan's Dacian Wars (101–102, 105–106) were two military campaigns fought between the Roman Empire and Dacia during Emperor Trajan's rule. The conflicts were triggered by the constant Dacian threat on the Danubian province of Moesia and also by the increasing need for resources of the economy of the Empire.

Background
Throughout the 1st century, Roman policy dictated that threats from neighbouring nations and provinces were to be contained promptly. Dacia had been on the Roman agenda since before the days of Caesar when the Dacians defeated a Roman army at the Battle of Histria.

Domitian's Dacian War had re-established peace with Dacia in 89 AD. However Decebalus used the Roman annual subsidy of 8 million sesterces and craftsmen in trades devoted to both peace and war, and war machines intended to defend the empire's borders to fortify his own defences instead. Despite some co-operation on the diplomatic front with Domitian, Decebalus continued to oppose Rome.

At the time, Rome was suffering from economic difficulties largely brought on by military invasions throughout Europe and in part due to a low gold content in Roman money as directed by Emperor Nero. Confirmed rumors of Dacian gold and other valuable trade resources inflamed the conflict, as did the Dacians' defiant behaviour, as they were "unbowed and unbroken".

However, other pressing reasons motivated them to action. Researchers estimate that only ten percent of barbarians such as Spanish and Gallic warriors had access to swords, usually the nobility. By contrast Dacia had rich resources of iron and copper and were prolific metal workers. A large percentage of Dacians owned swords, greatly reducing Rome's military advantage. Dacia sported 250,000 potential combatants, enough to enable an invasion. It was allied to several of its neighbours and on friendly terms with others that Rome considered enemies. Rome had no concrete defense policy and would not have been able to sustain a war of defense. As such, the new Emperor Trajan, himself an experienced soldier and tactician, began preparing for war. That Dacia was considered a substantial threat can be seen by the fact that Trajan withdrew troops from other borders leaving them dangerously undermanned.

Trajan's First War

After gaining the Senate's blessing for war, by 101 Trajan was ready to advance on Dacia. This was a war in which the Roman military's ingenuity and engineering were well demonstrated. The Roman offensive was spearheaded by two legionary columns, marching straight to the heart of Dacia, burning towns and villages en route. Trajan defeated a Dacian army at the Third Battle of Tapae.

In the winter of 101-2, the Roman army under Trajan had been amassed near the later city of Nicopolis ad Istrum at the junction of the Iatrus (Yantra) and the Rositsa rivers in readiness for the attack by the Sarmatian Roxolani tribe from north of the Danube (who were allied to the Dacians), and resulted in a Roman victory for which the city was named.

In 102 Decebalus chose to make peace once it became clear that the Roman advance towards Sarmizegetusa was unstoppable. The war had concluded with an important Roman victory and with the establishment of a garrison and an acting governor at Sarmizegetusa. A bridge later known as Trajan's bridge was constructed across the Danube at Drobeta to assist with the legionaries' advance. This bridge, probably the biggest at that time and for centuries to come, was designed by Apollodorus of Damascus and was meant to help the Roman army advance faster in Dacia in case of a future war. According to the peace terms, Decebalus got technical and military reinforcement from the Romans in order to create a powerful allied zone against the dangerous possible expeditions from the northern and eastern territories by hostile migrating peoples. The resources were instead used to rebuild Dacian fortresses and strengthen the army. Soon thereafter Decebalus turned against the Romans once again.

Trajan's Second War

Following the first war, Decebalus complied with Rome for a time, but was soon inciting revolt among tribes against them and pillaging Roman colonies across the Danube. True to his intrepid and optimistic nature, Trajan rallied his forces in AD 105 for a second war.

Like the first conflict, the second war involved several skirmishes that proved costly to the Roman military. Faced with large numbers of allied tribes, the legions struggled to attain a decisive victory, resulting in a second temporary peace. Eventually, goaded by the behaviour of Decebalus and his repeated violations of the treaty, Rome again brought in reinforcements, took the offensive and prevailed in 105. The next year they gradually conquered the mountain fortress system that surrounded the Dacian capital, Sarmizegetusa. The final decisive battle took place near the walls of Sarmizegetusa, presumably during the summer of 106, with the participation of the legions II Adiutrix and IV Flavia Felix and a detachment (vexillatio) from VI Ferrata.

The Dacians repelled the first attack, but the Romans, helped by a treacherous local nobleman, found and destroyed the water pipes of the Dacian capital. Running out of water and food the city fell and was razed. Decebalus fled, but was followed by the Roman cavalry and committed suicide rather than submit. Nevertheless, the war went on. Thanks to the treason of a confidant of the Dacian king, Bicilis, the Romans found Decebalus's treasure in the river of Sargesia/Sargetia - a fortune estimated by Carcopino at 165,500 kg of gold and 330,000 kg of silver. The last battle took place at Porolissum (Moigrad).

Conclusion and aftermath
The conclusion of the Dacian Wars marked a triumph for Rome and its armies. Trajan announced 123 days of celebrations throughout the Empire. Dacia's rich gold mines were secured and it is estimated that Dacia then contributed 700 million Denarii per annum to the Roman economy, providing finance for Rome's future campaigns and assisting with the rapid expansion of Roman towns throughout Europe. The remains of the mining activities are still visible, especially at Roșia Montană. One hundred thousand male slaves were sent back to Rome; and to discourage future revolts, legions XIII Gemina and V Macedonica were permanently posted in Dacia. The conquered half (southern) of Dacia was annexed, becoming a province while the northern part remained free but never formed a state.

The two wars were notable victories in Rome's extensive expansionist campaigns, gaining Trajan the people's admiration and support. The conclusion of the Dacian Wars marked the beginning of a period of sustained growth and relative peace in Rome. Trajan began extensive building projects and was so prolific in claiming credit that he was given the nickname Ivy. Trajan became an honorable civil leader, improving Rome's civic infrastructure, thereby paving the way for internal growth and reinforcement of the Empire as a whole.

As a consequence of the war, Dacia went through a huge demographic change. In the province of Dacia, out of 3000 identified personal names only 60 were of Dacian, while 2200 were of Roman origin. "...Trajan, after he had subdued Dacia, had transplanted thither an infinite number of men from the whole Roman world, to people the country and the cities; as the land had been exhausted of inhabitants in the long war maintained by Decebalus."

Most of the Dacian population was from now outside Transylvania, known as the Free Dacians, who continuously raided the province allying themselves with the Sarmatians, while the insiders (who were divided up by the Romans to tribes ) made at least two rebellions against Roman authority.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Trajan's Dacian Wars


text:
Grange-over-Sands railway station

Grange-over-Sands is a railway station on the Furness Line, which runs between Barrow-in-Furness and Lancaster. The station, situated 15+1/2 mi north-west of Lancaster, serves the town of Grange-over-Sands in Cumbria. It is owned by Network Rail and managed by Northern Trains.

History
The station was opened as Grange on 1 September 1857 by the Ulverstone and Lancaster Railway.

The station was renamed several times, alternating between Grange and Grange-over-Sands, the current name being settled on by the London Midland and Scottish Railway in October 1930.

The station building was designed by the Lancaster architect E. G. Paley for the Furness Railway Company in about 1864.

Two camping coaches were positioned here by the London Midland Region from 1954 to 1964, and four coaches from 1965 to 1970.

At one time the line carried a very heavy industrial traffic to support the iron and steel industry of the Furness area, including coke from County Durham.

Location
The station is adjacent to the Grange-over-Sands Promenade which runs along the edge of Morecambe Bay (until the River Kent changed its course, it was alongside the promenade - it is now further out in the bay towards Arnside).

Facilities
The station booking office is on the "up" (Lancaster) platform and is staffed all week; the "down" (Barrow-in-Furness) platform features a second-hand book-shop named Oversands Bookshop. There is step-free access to both platforms. Digital information screens, customer help points and automatic announcements provide train running information.

There is a small car park at the station, and a bus-stop for local services. The X6 bus operated by Stagecoach also travels to Ulverston and Barrow (westbound) and Kendal (eastbound), departing every hour during the day.

The station was awarded 'Heritage Station of the Year' in 2012.

Services
It is primarily served by local services from Lancaster to Barrow-in-Furness, with some continuing to Sellafield or Carlisle via the Cumbrian Coast Line. A number of southbound services run through to Preston and Manchester Airport. There is normally one train an hour in each direction on weekdays & Saturdays (with peak extras) and an hourly service on Sundays. Since the May 2018 timetable change, there is a Sunday service on the Cumbrian Coast and a handful of through trains operate (three each way - connections are available at Barrow at other times).

title: Grange-over-Sands railway station


text:
Viability

Viability or viable may refer to:

Biology, medicine or ecology

 * Viability selection, the selection of individual organisms who can survive until they are able to reproduce
 * Fetal viability, the ability of a fetus to survive outside of the uterus
 * Genetic viability, chance of a population of plants or animals to avoid the problems of inbreeding
 * Minimum viable population, a lower bound on the population of a species, such that it can survive in the wild
 * Population viability analysis, a species-specific method of risk assessment frequently used in conservation biology
 * Viable count, of viable cells

Business

 * Viability study, a study of the profitability of a business concept which is to be converted into a business
 * Minimum viable product, in product development, a strategy used for fast and quantitative market testing of a product or product feature

Other uses

 * Viable Paradise, an annual one-week writing workshop held each autumn on Martha's Vineyard
 * Viable system model, a scientific model by Stafford Beer of the organization of a viable or autonomous system
 * Viable system theory, a modelling approach that enables complex strategic and operative business and financial systems to be modelled and explored.
 * Viability theory, an area of mathematics that studies the evolution of dynamical systems under constraints to the system's state

title: Viability


text:
SynOptics

SynOptics Communications was a Santa Clara, California-based early computer network equipment vendor from 1985 until 1994. SynOptics popularized the concept of the modular Ethernet hub and high-speed Ethernet networking over copper twisted-pair and fiber optic cables.

History
SynOptics Communications was founded in 1985 by Andrew K. Ludwick and Ronald V. Schmidt, both of whom worked at Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (PARC). The most significant product that Synoptics produced was LattisNet (originally named AstraNet) in 1987. This meant that unshielded twisted-pair cabling already installed in office buildings could be re-utilized for computer networking instead of special coaxial cables. The star network topology made the network much easier to manage and maintain. Together these two innovations directly led to the ubiquity of Ethernet networks.

Before the final standard version of what is known today as the 10BASE-T protocol, there were several different methods and standards for running Ethernet over twisted-pair cabling at various speeds, such as StarLAN. LattisNet was similar to the final 10BASE-T protocol except that it had slightly different voltage and signal characteristics. Synoptics updated their product line to the 10BASE-T specification once it was published.

Through the late 1980s and into the early 1990s, SynOptics produced a series of innovative products including early 10BASE-2 hubs, pre-standard (LattisNet), and 100BASE-TX products.

The company was the market leader in Ethernet LAN hubs over rivals 3Com and Cabletron. Despite intense competition that drove down prices, Synoptics' annual revenue grew to a high of $700 million in 1993.

To move away from the rapidly commoditizing Layer 1/2 Ethernet equipment market and grow their market share in the increasingly lucrative and more profitable Layer 3 networking arena, SynOptics merged with Billerica, Massachusetts based Wellfleet Communications on July 6, 1994, in a US$ 2.7 Billion dollar deal to form Bay Networks. SynOptics headquarters at the time of the merger with Wellfleet was in the pair of strikingly-designed sloped buildings at the Northeast corner of the intersection of California's Great America Parkway and Mission College Blvd in Santa Clara, an area known for featuring numerous networking start-ups such as Ungermann-Bass. These buildings are currently occupied by Palo Alto Networks.

Bay Networks was acquired by Canadian company Nortel in June 1998 for $9.1 billion, forming Nortel Networks.

title: SynOptics


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CyberArmy University

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was MERGE to CyberArmy. Reading the comments, although nearly all are from redlinked users or are usigned, there is are numerous suggestions that this should be merged (some of the deletes are newbies saying delete write comments that sound like merges). -Splash 21:24, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

CyberArmy University

 * delete The article is not a relevant article to the community and does not fall into public interrest. --Cybertnt 02:04, 9 Apr 2005 (CET)
 * delete Not relevant for wikipedia. --Matthias Herzhoff 02:08, 9 Apr 2005 (CET)
 * keep Article ties in with Cyberarmy granting it a valid place on Wikipedia.*Kat* 02:06, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * delete Any article's relevance in wikipedia could be argued. But i'll vote on deletion; not due to its lack of relevence to wikipedia though. :Purefreak 09:03, 12 Apr 2005 (CMT+2)
 * delete Article should be tacked onto the Cyberarmy entry in the wikipedia granting it a valid place on Wikipedia. 14:26, Jun 21, 2005 (EDT)
 * This nom was never added to a main VfD page. Doing so now.  Merge and redirect with CyberArmy.  JYolkowski // talk 14:44, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Advertisement and absolute crap. McA 19:40, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Bartolo Colón

Bartolo Colón (born May 24, 1973), nicknamed "Big Sexy", is a Dominican-American professional baseball pitcher for the Karachi Monarchs of Baseball United. He previously played for 11 different Major League Baseball (MLB) teams: the Cleveland Indians (1997–2002), Montreal Expos (2002), Chicago White Sox (2003, 2009), Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (2004–2007), Boston Red Sox (2008), New York Yankees (2011), Oakland Athletics (2012–2013), New York Mets (2014–2016), Atlanta Braves (2017), Minnesota Twins (2017), and Texas Rangers (2018). Colón also played for the Águilas Cibaeñas of the Dominican Professional Baseball League (Dominican Winter League) and the Acereros de Monclova of the Mexican League.

Colón was selected to four MLB All-Star Games: for the Indians (1998), Angels (2005), Athletics (2013), and Mets (2016). He won the American League Cy Young Award with the Angels in 2005, when he led the league in wins. He was 42 and 349 days old when he became the oldest player to hit his first career home run. At age 45 during the 2018 season, Colón was the oldest active major league player and the last to have played for the Montreal Expos. He holds the record for most career wins by a Latin American-born pitcher.

In his last major-league season (2018), Colón and Rangers teammate Adrián Beltré were the last active players to have played in the 1990s. In August 2022, Colón announced that he intended to retire after the 2022–23 Dominican winter season. However, on October 23, 2023, Colón was drafted by the Karachi Monarchs of Baseball United.

Early life
Colón grew up in the town of Altamira in the Dominican Republic. He worked long days alongside his father, Miguel, harvesting coffee beans and fruit from the age of 9 to 14. Colón credited his childhood job with the development of his strength. He frequently does major charity work for his old community. Colón's mother, Adriana, died in 2014 of breast cancer.

Cleveland Indians
Colón was signed by the Cleveland Indians as an amateur free agent in 1993 and began his career in their minor league system. In 1995, pitching for Kinston of the Single-A Carolina League, he finished second in wins with 13 and ERA with 1.96, and led the circuit with 152 strikeouts. He was named the league's Pitcher of the Year, despite shutting down on August 1 with a bruised elbow. He was named the Indians' 1995 Minor League Player of the Year (receiving the "Lou Boudreau Award"). He played Triple-A ball with the Buffalo Bisons in 1997 and on June 21 became the only player in team history to throw a no-hitter at Sahlen Field, then called North AmeriCare Park.

Colón made his major league debut against the Anaheim Angels on April 4, 1997, receiving a no decision. In his first MLB season, Colón went 4–7 with a 5.65 earned run average. The following year, he set the modern-day but unofficial major league record for throwing the most pitches (20) in a single at bat on June 26, 1998 against Ricky Gutiérrez, who eventually struck out. That record was broken in 2018. Later that season, Colón won his only start of the 1998 American League Championship Series, pitching a four-hit, one-run complete game. In his 1999 season, Colón finished 18–5, pitching over 200 innings with 161 strikeouts and a 3.95 earned run average.

On September 18, 2000, Colón pitched a one-hitter against the New York Yankees. In both 2000 and 2001, Colón posted over 200 strikeouts, making him the first Indians pitcher since Gaylord Perry to record at least 200 strikeouts in back-to-back seasons.

Montreal Expos
On June 27, 2002, the Indians traded Colón and Tim Drew to the Montreal Expos in exchange for Lee Stevens, Brandon Phillips, Grady Sizemore, and Cliff Lee. Colón finished 2002 with a combined 20–8 record and a 2.93 earned run average, including 76 earned runs with 70 walks in $233 1/3$ innings, three shutouts, and eight complete games. Ultimately, he was the last active player who had played for the Montreal Expos.

Chicago White Sox
Before the 2003 season, Colón was traded to the Chicago White Sox with minor leaguer Jorge Nunez for Orlando Hernández, Rocky Biddle, Jeff Liefer and cash.

Anaheim Angels

A free agent after the previous season, he signed with the Anaheim Angels in 2004. Colón won 18 games with Anaheim in 2004. During the 2005 season, he went 21–8 with a 3.48 earned run average, and became the first Angels pitcher to win the Cy Young Award since Dean Chance in 1964. Due to a partially torn rotator cuff that he received in a playoff game against the Yankees in 2005, Colón spent much of the 2006 season on the disabled list with soreness or inflammation in his right shoulder. In 10 starts, Colón went 1–5 with a 5.11 earned run average.

On April 21, 2007, his first start of the 2007 season following his return from the disabled list, Colón pitched 7 innings, allowing one run on seven hits for his first win in 2007.

Boston Red Sox
On February 25, 2008, Colón signed a minor league deal with the Boston Red Sox and was invited to spring training. On May 15, 2008, he threw a one-hitter for the Red Sox' Triple-A team, the Pawtucket Red Sox. Six days later, Colón's contract was purchased by the Red Sox, and he was added to the active roster. Colón pitched his first game for the Red Sox on May 21, 2008, against the Kansas City Royals. He earned his 150th career win on June 11, 2008, against the Baltimore Orioles.

On September 19, 2008, Colón was placed on the suspended list by the Red Sox after leaving for the Dominican Republic to handle "personal matters" and deciding to stay, effectively ending his Red Sox career. He was placed on the restricted list on September 25, 2008. Colón spent the postseason on the restricted list as the Red Sox won the 2008 ALDS against the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in 4 games, but lost the 2008 ALCS against the Tampa Bay Rays in 7 games. He filed for free agency after the end of the 2008 season.

Second stint with the White Sox
Colón agreed to a one-year, $1 million contract to return to the Chicago White Sox in January 2009, shortly after they traded Javier Vázquez to the Atlanta Braves. He competed for the fourth and fifth starters' positions in the White Sox rotation.

Colón made his comeback from off-season surgery to remove bone chips from his pitching arm elbow during the White Sox Spring training, in the Cactus League in Arizona. Manager Ozzie Guillén named him the White Sox' fifth starter before the start of the regular season. Colón won his first start in his second stint in Chicago, pitching six strong innings of three-hit ball as the Sox blanked Minnesota 8–0 on April 11, 2009. In doing so he became the first White Sox starting pitcher to win a regular season game in 2009. Colón then suffered another injury and did not pitch again for the remainder of the season. He was released on September 16.

New York Yankees

Colón did not pitch in 2010 due to ongoing right shoulder and elbow pain and damage to the rotator cuff, ligaments and tendons. In March 2010, he received a transplant of stem cells to repair the damaged tissues in his right shoulder. The orthopedic surgeon who performed the surgery said he had used human growth hormone in previous surgeries of the same type but not with Colón. The surgery was scrutinized by Major League Baseball but no wrongdoing was found.

Colón then played in the Pre-World Championship in Puerto Rico, winter ball with the Aguilas and the Leones del Escogido, and the Puerto Rican winter league., and announced that he would attempt a comeback to the major leagues for the 2011 season. He signed a minor league deal with the New York Yankees on January 26, 2011. Colón was invited to spring training, competing for a spot on the 25-man roster, despite coming into camp 30 pounds overweight. He was named to the Yankees' Opening Day roster in the bullpen. Colón made his first start for the Yankees on April 20, taking the rotation spot of the injured Phil Hughes. Through May, Colon was 3–3 with a 3.26 earned run average. On May 30, 2011, he threw a four-hit shutout, his first since 2006 against the Athletics. He sustained a hamstring injury on June 11, 2011, against the Cleveland Indians. When he was injured, he was in the seventh inning of a shutout game, but he limped off the field after covering first base on a ground ball to Yankees first baseman Mark Teixeira. Colón then ended up on the 15-day disabled list. He said that he'd be back pitching right when eligible. On July 2, Colón returned to the Yankees and threw six shutout innings against the New York Mets. On July 14 against the Blue Jays, Colón exited after recording only two outs in the first inning while yielding eight runs, the shortest outing of his career. Colón's 2011 season was somewhat of a resurgence, going 8–10 with a 4.00 earned run average and a 1.29 walks plus hits divided by innings pitched ratio. He was demoted to the bullpen when the Yankees made the postseason and the team lost to the Detroit Tigers in the 2011 ALDS. He became a free agent following the end of the season.

Oakland Athletics
On January 14, 2012, Colón agreed to a one-year, $2 million contract with the Oakland Athletics. He started the second game of the season for the Athletics in the Opening Series in Tokyo, Japan, throwing eight innings, giving up one run over three hits while recording six strikeouts. On April 18 Colón threw 38 consecutive strikes, the most since 1988, when MLB began to collect pitching data in-depth, in a start against the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. He started the 2012 season with a 3–1 record and 2.64 earned run average, but faltered with a 1–4 record and 5.80 earned run average in his next seven starts.

On August 22, 2012, MLB suspended Colón for 50 games after he tested positive for synthetic testosterone, a performance-enhancing substance in violation of the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. He was the second major leaguer to be suspended within a two-week time frame for testosterone (along with San Francisco Giants star Melky Cabrera).

The Athletics signed Colón to a one-year, $3 million deal for 2013. He was selected for his third All-Star team in July after posting an 11–3 record with a 2.78 earned run average.

2014
On December 11, 2013, Colón agreed to a 2-year, $20 million contract with the New York Mets. On June 18, he got his first hit in nine years when he hit a double off Lance Lynn. On August 8, 2014, Colón recorded his 200th win in a 5–4 victory over the Phillies. He is the third Dominican-born pitcher to do so, after Juan Marichal and Pedro Martínez, and the third pitcher to do so in a Mets uniform, after Orel Hershiser and Martínez. Colón finished the 2014 season with 31 starts, 15–13 record, $202 1/3$ innings pitched, 151 strikeouts, and a 4.09 earned run average while giving up 218 hits, 30 walks, 22 home runs, and 97 runs (92 of them earned).

2015
In 2015 against the Washington Nationals, Colón became the third opening day pitcher over 40 years old to strike out eight batters, after Cy Young and Nolan Ryan. On April 12, 2015, against the Atlanta Braves, Colón hit a run-scoring single off Alex Wood, the 6th run batted in of his career. On April 23, 2015, Colón completed an unassisted pickoff of Atlanta Braves catcher A. J. Pierzynski en route to becoming the first pitcher aged 40 years or older to win his first four starts in a season in the past 80 years. He also tallied one more run batted in, a double on May 31, 2015. Colón became the first pitcher ever to record wins against one team (the Baltimore Orioles) for seven different clubs. Six pitchers held the previous record of six clubs.

On June 9, 2015, Colón set a new Mets franchise record of most consecutive decisions as a starting pitcher, achieving 26 decisions in 26 consecutive starts. This record was previously held by Dwight Gooden. On September 5, 2015, Justin Bour of the Miami Marlins hit a chopper down the first-base line; Colón charged and made a behind-the-back flip to first for the out. Video of the play garnered widespread media acclaim. In 33 games (31 starts), he finished the 2015 season with a 14–13 record and a 4.16 earned run average. On October 21, 2015, Colón pitched $1 1/3$ innings in relief to earn the win in game 4 of the 2015 National League Championship Series and help the Mets sweep the Chicago Cubs.

On October 27, 2015, Colón pitched $2 1/3$ innings in relief and took the loss at the end of Game 1 of the World Series, becoming the oldest man ever to lose a World Series game. It was his first World Series appearance since he was a rookie with the Indians in 1997, and the Mets lost the series in five games to the Kansas City Royals.

2016
On December 16, 2015, Colón re-signed with the Mets on a 1-year, $7.25 million contract. He entered the 2016 major league season as the oldest active player. Following the retirement of Maicer Izturis, he became the last active major league player who appeared for the Montreal Expos.

On May 7, Colón hit his first major league home run, against the San Diego Padres at Petco Park off of James Shields. At age 42 years and 349 days, Colón broke a record, becoming the oldest major league player to hit his first home run. On June 21, he was injured when Whit Merrifield hit his pitch right to the pitcher's mound, striking Colón in the thumb. He was immediately taken out of the game. On July 8, Colón was named to the 2016 MLB All-Star Game, replacing Madison Bumgarner. On August 15, he drew a walk after having not been walked in his previous 281 plate appearances, achieving a new MLB record. On October 1, Colón became the 47th player ever to make 500 career starts.

Atlanta Braves
On November 17, 2016, Colón signed a one-year, $12.5 million contract with the Atlanta Braves. The Braves designated him for assignment on June 29, 2017, after he put up a 2–8 record with an 8.14 earned run average and 1.78 WHIP in 13 starts. He was released on July 4.

Minnesota Twins
On July 7, 2017, Colón signed a minor league contract with the Minnesota Twins. Colón was called up on July 18 to start against the New York Yankees. On August 4, he threw a complete game against the Texas Rangers; at age 44, he became the oldest American League pitcher to record a nine-inning complete-game win since 45-year-old Nolan Ryan did the same in 1992. Later that month he became the 18th pitcher to record a win against all 30 MLB teams, completing the feat against the Arizona Diamondbacks. He became a free agent following the season.

Texas Rangers
On February 4, 2018, Colón signed a minor league contract with the Texas Rangers that included an invitation to spring training. He was released on March 24, and signed another minor league contract with Texas on March 26. Colón was called up on April 2 to start against the Oakland Athletics. On April 15, Colón took a perfect game through 7 innings until walking Carlos Correa. Colón went through 7$2⁄3$ innings, allowing one run as the Rangers won 3–1 in 10 innings. On April 28, 2018, he pitched seven innings while allowing six hits and three runs on 98 pitches, being the winning pitcher in a 7–4 result against the Toronto Blue Jays. This was the eleventh team with which he recorded at least one win. A win on June 18 against Kansas City moved him past Juan Marichal, the "Dominican Dandy", to become the pitcher with most career wins from the Dominican Republic. On August 7, in an 11–4 victory against the Seattle Mariners, Colón earned his 246th career pitching win, moving him past Dennis Martinez for the most victories all time by a Latin American-born pitcher. He elected free agency on October 29, and was not signed for the 2019 season.

Acereros de Monclova
On February 14, 2020, Colón signed with the Acereros de Monclova of the Mexican League. However, he never played in 2020, since the Mexican League season was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. He made his first pre-season appearance for the team on May 1, 2021. Colon made his regular season debut on May 21 and pitched five innings, giving up five hits and one run. In August 2022, he announced that he would retire from baseball following one last season of winter league baseball with the Águilas Cibaeñas of Dominican Professional Baseball League. In 11 starts 61.1 innings of work he went 6-2 with a 4.55 ERA and 40 strikeouts.

On June 2, 2023, Colón officially retired from professional baseball.

Karachi Monarchs
On October 23, 2023, Colón was selected in the second round by the Karachi Monarchs, with the 16th overall pick of the 2023 Baseball United inaugural draft. In being selected, Colon returned from his retirement from professional baseball.

Pitching style
Colón threw four pitches. Early in his career, he had excellent velocity on his four-seam fastball, throwing it in the mid-90s and occasionally touching 100 mph. In his later career, Colón's four-seamer sat at 86–91 mph, and he paired it with a two-seamer at 84–88 mph. This combination of fastballs made up nearly 90% of Colón's pitches, but he also throws a changeup to left-handed hitters, and a slider. He was primarily known as a control pitcher, with an exceptional ability to spot pitches at any location. This kept the number of walks he allowed to a minimum, but led to more hits as he would attempt to throw strikes.

Awards

 * Cy Young Award (2005)
 * 4× MLB All-Star (1998, 2005, 2013, 2016)
 * 4× Pitcher of the Month Award (June 1998, May 2002, August 2005, June 2013)
 * 5× Player of the Week Award (June 21, 1998; September 24, 2000; September 14, 2003; September 6, 2016; May 8, 2016)
 * Players Choice Award for Outstanding Pitcher (2005)
 * The Sporting News Pitcher of the Year (2005)
 * Set record for most wins by a Latin American pitcher (247 – August 7, 2018)

League statistical leader

 * 2× NL bases on balls per nine innings leader (2015, 2016)
 * 2× MLB complete games leader (2002, 2003)
 * NL hits allowed leader (2015)
 * MLB shutouts leader (2013)
 * AL wins leader (2005)

Nickname
Colón was known as "Big Sexy" by his teammates and the media. He applied for a trademark on the Big Sexy nickname and plans on making apparel out of it.

Personal life
Colón's wife, Rosanna, and their four sons live in New Jersey. On September 30, 2014, Colón and his wife became US citizens. Colón met his wife in the Dominican Republic when he was 13 years old.

In 2015, Colón was sued in Manhattan by a Washington Heights woman seeking child support for her son and daughter, who were fathered by Colón during his marriage. On June 17, 2016, Colón and Alexandra Santos agreed to a deal that included child support payments.

title: Bartolo Colón


text:
User talk:Akiss

Mother tongues
Maybe it's too personal a question, but how come you have 3 native tongues?--Tamas 19:33, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I have 3 mothers :) No, actually, I was born half Szekely half Hungarian in Romania, and I'm living in France since quite some time now. So technically Hungarian is my mother tongue, but in reality I am thinking in both - or a mix of - these three languages. And since I understood the Babel definition of native tongue as "comparable to a native speaker", i put them all.. If I'm to look at the full half of the glass, I'd say, one must have quite fine ears to tell I have a non-native accent in any of my languages. :) Or, to look at the empty half, I'd say I don't really master any of those at a perfect native speaker level. Hungarian education was brief and stopped too early (since my fourth grade Hungarian classes were replaced by Romanian - as one of the presents of the Ceausescu regime of the time), Romanian came in for some time in the middle, and French arrived late. So, any suggestion to change the list? Or maybe propose changing the template? Akiss 21:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Csak kivancsi voltam :) Szerintem nyugodtan hagyd igy. --Tamas 09:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) Translating: 'I was just curious. Suggest leaving it as it is.'

Hungarian versions of place names in articles pertaining to Romania
Hi! There is a bit of a controversy evolving about the Hungarian versions of place names in articles pertaining to Romania. Criztu has started to delete the Hungarian (and in one case, German) variants of place names from the following articles, claiming that they were irrelevant: (Harghita, Covasna_(county), Cluj). I feel this move is unjustified. I would appreciate if you could have a look at the problem and give your opinion on Talk:Harghita.--Tamas 28 June 2005 15:22 (UTC)

Szekely
In response to your question, the Category:Eurasian nomads contains many people who were historically nomadic (such as the Buglars) but who have since settled. The article doesn't discuss their nomadic history in great length but it does mention it. I would be happy to add to that section of the article when time permits. --Briangotts 8 July 2005 14:19 (UTC)

Talk:Harghita
You might want to take a look at how I dealt with this: I just reformatted his comments so that it was clear where they fit in (this is how he probably should have formatted them in the first place). This comes up a lot: a lot of people only have a limited grasp of wikisyntax. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:59, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

wikipedia naming convention
hi, i inform u that in accordance with Naming conventions (geographic names) i removed the names of the hungarian kingdom administrative divisions that were provided as alternate names for contemporary romanian administrative divisions from the leading paragraph in their coresponding articles Criztu 10:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC) criztu

Great Lakes
Just a quick note to let you know that I undid your contribution to the Great Lakes article, not because I necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but because your addition is not supported by the citations that already appear at the end of the sentence you edited. If you review the discussion page of the article you'll see that recently there was a fairly "lively" debate regarding this topic. If you can cite a reputable source for your claim, personally I have no problem including it. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The appropriate citations are in the first paragraph of Lake Baikal. I don't have time to read the "lively" discussion, or go into lengthy conversations about this issue. Note only that saying "the greatest" implies "greatest by all measures (volume and area)" which is not true. When comparing water masses (such as lakes) volume is usually the implicit measurement. I let you decide if you prefer to leave the article as is, or change it. Thanks Akiss (talk) 19:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Orbanbalazs.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Orbanbalazs.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Akiss


text: User talk:80.44.221.204

title: User talk:80.44.221.204


text:
Talk:POSIX

Single UNIX Specification
I don't think it is a good idea to merge the POSIX and Single UNIX Specification articles. Judging by how many articles link to POSIX, it is a very current and wanted topic. note that even the article Single_UNIX_Specification itself links to POSIX ;). Even though POSIX is beeing "phased out" in favor of Single UNIX Specification, that doesn't mean that the article has to be too. Compare XFree86 and X.Org, virtually all Linux distros today are using the X.Org implementation, yet the article XFree86 still exists and should keep existing. 84.161.178.29 00:09, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Donald Axel writes:
 * No don't mix Posix and Single Unix. There are differences though mostly legal, as far as I know: Posix is ISO and is mandatory by DOD for any computer application system. (By ISO is meant a standard acknowledged and recommended by ISO or more precisely by International Standards Organization/International Electrotechnical Commission, ISO/IEC subcommittee 22.).

 * I would like to dig more into that question but do not have resources now. Google: POSIX "Portable Operating System Interface" "Cross Platform" yields (nr.2) Microsoft Solution Guide for Migrating High Performance Computing (HPC) Applications from UNIX to Windows

 * Additional: I don't know where to get the full story on POSIX and RMStallman, but I suspect that IX is the "Unix" hint and X is cross platform. RMS is notorious for multi-purpose acronyms.

 * At the moment I do not have access to ISO-2001-2002-2003, but will look up comments on the name as soon as possible.--d-axel (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

 * IX: lots of unices ended in IX (e.g. dynix, ultrix, minix, xenix); POS: Piece Of Shit. --moof 08:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

 * My humble opinion: saying that the POSIX article should be merged with Single UNIX Specification is like saying that because Bush now has Clinton's function, the article on Bill Clinton should be merged into George W. Bush.
 * Had the SUS been made, maintained and officially accepted as the successor to POSIX by the IEEE, then a merger would be more justified, but even then, they are two separate things. Heck, if we just said "oh, they're similar, let's just merge them!" to every article with remote connection to another one, I bet we could reduce all of Wikipedia to a single article. --Sir Link 22:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * After about half a decade, I would like to revive the discussion about the relation between SUS and POSIX. Both articles currently talk about POSIX:2001, POSIX:2004, and POSIX:2008, therefore adding unnecessary redundancy to Wikipedia. Referencing the Bush/Clinton argument: Sure, if there is historical significance to keep both the SUS and the POSIX article, then both articles should be kept. But we should add explicit information in both articles about how these two terms relate to each other. By the way: who is Donald Axel? --Abdull (talk) 19:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Donald Axel is a sysadm/lecturer and I have been member of a local ISO organization (ISO is rather business oriented, not so free, earns money by selling specifications and so on, you buy a membership or if you can give competent insight you get an invitation). --d-axel (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

POSIX compatibility
Which OS'es are certified as POSIX compatible? I only know of Windows NT, are there others?

 * I wasn't aware that NT was POSIX compatible. But mainly the UNIX-like OSes fit into that area. Things like Linux, BSD, Solaris, etc. As for certification, the article links to this, which may clarify. MichaelBillington 00:54, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

This part of the article needs some serious help. Saying something is POSIX compliant is a legal statement and most of the OSes listed are not certified. The article was missing 3 big ones here, AIX, HPUX, and Solaris. If you take a look at the list of compliant OSes maintained by IEEE and the Open Group you will not find BSD, OS X, or Windows. I think this part of the article is pretty misleading, especially when you put FreeBSD, Linux, etc as "aiming for compliance".

 * I fully agree. Some fact checking might be nice on this article, people. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.104.168.108 (talk) 12:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

 * On the page it lists Mac OS X as fully compliant, but I don't think it is because the semaphores part of the pthreads library isn't implemented on it. I'm not 100% sure if that's a compliance issue; but everywhere I look says that pthreads is part of the POSIX standard.

 * This situation is not much better as of September 2007; Saying that Linux is "mostly compliant" is misleading also, since, for all intents and purposes, it is POSIX compliant, it's just that there are many flavours and no one distribution is going to pay IEEE's fees for certification. Some elaboration on this point would be useful and informative. --Rhombus 16:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Mac OS X is not POSIX compliant for many reasons. I typically forget about the issues after a while but any release that did only offer BASH-3.x cannot be POSIX compliant and I recently discovered that Mac OS X does not fill in most members of the sructure siginfo_t used by waitid. This makes Mac OS X pretty unusable for software that blindly assumes POSIX compatibility. Schily (talk) 15:30, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

 * The section about "mostly compliant" still looks rather arbitrary. E.g. I cannot think of anything in Contiki that is POSIX compliant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.255.223.56 (talk) 14:33, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

OpenVMS from Digital Equipment (now HP) is POSIX compliant. POSIX interface was implemented around 1990 starting from posix 1003.1 and going on with the others interfaces (shell and utilities, real time...) --Mimmetta 11:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The question would be: to what revision of the standard is OpenVMS compatible? Schily (talk) 15:30, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

POSIX subsets
This should include the different subsets of POSIX. For instance, POSIX 2003 is the newest one, and only IBM AIX passes that one. Stuff like that should be mentioned. Someone who knows more about these things should add to the article!

Stallman's intended expansion of "POS"
From the article: "The term POSIX was suggested by Richard Stallman (not as a compliment) .... POSIX has been backronymed to Portable Operating System Interface". Is this implying Stallman expanded POS as "piece of shit"? If so, the article should say so explicitly. Indefatigable
 * I wondered the same thing. It isn't very clear the way the article explains it. Jdufresne 23:17, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * At the risk of saying "me too".. I will. If Stallman did intend for POS to stand for piece of shit, I'd like to know his reasons and have them at least referenced by the article. If not, then the article should be reworded. Workaphobia 04:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Uh.. or POSitive? Isn't HURD intended to be UNIX esque (and therefore presumably, POSIX compliant in its design)  Hmm..?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.105.228.252 (talk) 00:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Why the cleanup tag?
I don't see why it's there. Other than the acronyms this page seems fine to me. Anyone care to explain? MichaelBillington 00:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed it. I think there is a vast conspiracy to make Wikipedia look like crap by adding such tags to many articles. :P --Pmsyyz 23:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Conspiracy, eh?, perhaps the cabal would have something to say about this. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 01:30, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Other OS'es
What about all the other distros and forks of Linux and FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, etc? 70.111.224.252 02:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

None of the above are POSIX compliant. NetBSD and FreeBSD are close, but not there yet.

Isn't BeOS POSIX compliant? -Mostly, but not entirely. A brief (and unfortunately a bit dated) explanation can be found here (see #69 and #70) --Apophos (talk) 21:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

penOS/blagOS - do these exist or are they just persistent vandalism?

Is Windows really compliant?
Isn't POSIX compliance a facet of the operating system itself? Does POSIX compliance really count when added by separate payware software packages? Paul 04:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Windows is POSIX 1003.1 compliant since Windows NT. After Windows NT this compliance shall be activated using SFU 3.5. Whatever this is free or not, has nothing to do with compliance. SFU 3.5 is neithertheless free if you have windows.

 * Free is interesting news to me. A few years back, I paid $99 for SFU 3.0.
 * With SFU 3.0, I found it had more surprises/incompatibilities than Cygwin. For example, the software links created by SFU were not compatible with Windows XP links! Rhmccullough (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

 * it's still provided through an addon of some sort, so windows should be in the "Compliant via compatibility feature" section, no?

Linux
Michael, with all due respect, the guys on freenode are hardly likely to have much of a footing in reality. Linux is not POSIX certified. See http://get.posixcertified.ieee.org/search_certprodlist.tpl?CALLER=cert_prodlist.tpl

Integrity, on the other hand, actually is, so you should put it back.

 * Linux is definitely NOT POSIX compliant, even with glibc and the GNU userspace tools added. It's very simple to make Linux non-compliant, disable Unix domain sockets (it's a kernel option). If anything it might be compliant with 'additional features' and 'added tools'.

 * Also interesting that someone added a link to http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/posix/ for Linux, even though it isn't on the lists there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.104.168.108 (talk) 12:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

 * While it is probably true that Linux is not POSIX compliant, your logic is quite disingenuous: just because some builds are not compliant does not actually mean that all are! —SamB (talk) 04:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

It's a pity that from this article it seems like Microsoft Windows is more Unix than Linux is. I would like to propose that on the list of "POSIX-compliant" systems there must be only certified products. Additional software (patch!) which is compliant to POSIX does not mean that the system becomes compliant itself. Ask IEEE, do not make original research please! 194.29.147.6 13:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Linux and Windows
Without wanting to repeat the two above discussions, but with bringing them together:

 * It is strange that Windows is in a listing that appears as being more POSIX compliant than Linux
 * The listings of Windows seem to have a lot of exceptions in them ("When using ...", "Include the ....") that seem to be deliberatly vague.
 * If only certain editions of Vista support it, then it shouldn't say "Windows Vista" in the list, because having some editions of it be compliant doesn't make the complete "Windows Vista" POSIX compliant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.74.100.50 (talk) 13:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Can the split up between the listings be made different, instead of having a list "Fully Compliant" and "Mostly Compliant"? The fact that some versions of Windows appear in a list as more compliant than Linux could be a sign that the criterium on which the two lists are based isn't so well chosen.

 * POSIX was created by the U.S. government (the DoD?) solely for procurement purposes. The U.S. federal procurements needed a way to legally specify the requirements for various sorts of calls for bids and contracts in a way that could be used to exclude systems to which a given existing code base would NOT be portable. So, for example, Microsoft's Windows NT was written with enough POSIX conformance to qualify for some government call for bids ... even though the POSIX subsystem was essentially useless in terms of practical portability and compatibility with UNIX® systems. But see my major rant ;-) It would be nice to find RS for the first statement though. User:ScotXW t@lk 17:16, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX is not an operating system
The list "Fully POSIX-compliant" under "POSIX-oriented operating systems" includes "Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX". However, Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX isn't an Operating System but a software package. Why is this included in a list of Operating Systems?

--193.74.100.50 07:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

UNIX System Services
UNIX_System_Services should be added as it is fully POSIX certified. Is there any problem with adding this to the list? --Lindy 22:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Link need update or removal
The "OS Comparison" external link has outdated information on UNIX as it is since a couple of years available in a free, open source version (Solaris/OpenSolaris) which is not reflected. --Thommym (talk) 20:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Good catch. 2003? Removed. --Unixguy (talk) 19:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Inter-article conflict?
Does windows really Editor war include vi? 121.44.89.26 (talk) 14:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

po6
Just a random observation… if you flip the word “god” around, you get an odd spelling of POSIX. Anyone know for sure whether that’s purely coincidental? —Frungi (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I don't even think you noticing it was a coincidence. Sam Barsoom 00:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

reference #8
this is so old, citing it is just pointless. According to it, *BSD costs ~$50, has only good connectivity and can't handle 'huge' systems. 84.191.204.114 (talk) 07:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

PS: I forgot to quote (about *BSD systems) They diverge from the mainstream UNIX (and POSIX) capabilities They only run on x86 processors 84.191.204.114 (talk) 07:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

MKS Toolkit
MKS is another popular UNIX for Windows system. I don't know how it rates against POSIX standards. I would guess pretty good, because it would be good marketing strategy. Rhmccullough (talk) 13:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The MKS toolkit is only a set of commands; it does not provide the C API of the POSIX standard.Professor Tournesol (talk) 10:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Is Minix POSIX as stated - I very much doubt it?
The article says Minix is fully POSIX compliant, yet the Minux article says it is a Unix-like operating system. If if was POSIX compliant, I doubt it would be a Unix operating system would it not? I personally think Minix should be removed from the list, but will not do it until I get some feedback from others.

Dave Drkirkby (talk) 12:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You might be confusing some facts. There's no reason an OS can't be both POSIX-compliant and Unix-like. C xong (talk) 03:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Controversies
Is the Controversies section of any use? I can think of a gazillion things most operating systems do differently than POSIX. Does anyone use SCCS? Has anyone ever noticed Linux ps isn't exactly as what POSIX describes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.180.9.80 (talk) 15:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Linux is an operating system kernel delivering an interface to disk, net and other devices; "Linux" as such is not responsible for utilities like "ps" (process select and show). The system interface to the kernel is even "hidden" behind the Gnu Libc which implements Posix but also add when needed. The good thing is that Linux projects combine to a system on which you may find (almost?) all Posix specified functionality - and then some. Putting so many projects together in a way which actually works would not be possible without a strong Unix specification.
 * --d-axel (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

 * The IP obviously meant GNU/Linux. --Mudd1 (talk) 06:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I also found this strange. I don't even understand the argument. Why would 1MB blocks be "intuitive" for du? The file system block size would be intuitive because that's what du is supposed to take into account. From the manpage, it would seem the story is also a bit more complex than that paragraph would make it seem: "Display values are in units of the first available SIZE from --block-size, and the DU_BLOCK_SIZE, BLOCK_SIZE and BLOCKSIZE environment variables. Otherwise, units default to 1024 bytes (or 512 if POSIXLY_CORRECT is set)." --Mudd1 (talk) 06:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I agree that (at least as currently written) it's not clear what the usefulness of this section is - personally, I'd advocate for removing it. It describes how one particular group didn't like part of a standard and decided to violate it by default and provide an option to retain conformance. I don't think that this is notable, because it's something that's practically inevitable with any kind of standard. As the other comments here point out, there are countless examples of implementations deciding not to conform to the POSIX standard. The difference (which I don't think has much bearing here) is that they don't all come with entertaining (to some) quotes from Richard Stallman! Khromegnome (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Mac OS X and POSIX
Mac OS X may have passed the POSIX copliance tests but it is not POSIX compliant as it only provides bash-3.x as a shell callable via "sh". Bash-3.x is known to have major bugs (e.g. bash -e is not implemented correctly which e.g. causes makefiles to continue after errors) that make it non-POSIX.

Mac OS X also comes with GNU make that is known for being not POSIX compliant because it's Makefile parser does not handle space characters correcty and because it calls commands via "sh -c cmd" instead of "sh -ce cmd". --Schily (talk) 09:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

 * On the other hand, the given source asserts "Full POSIX compliance and UNIX03 certification". Do you have a WP:RS source in mind, or is this merely a passing comment? TEDickey (talk) 10:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

 * A failing SW build process as a result from missing POSIX comliance is of course a reliable source. And BTW: I believe that you are on the POSIX mailing list where we did discuss the related problems. Should you have a problem to remember this discussion? In our case, "fully certified" obviously does not mean fully POSIX compliant. --Schily (talk) 11:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

 * You appear to be referring to a mailing list, which is not the actual deciding body. Individuals do make comments, some lead to documentation updates.  From observation, it appears that the sponsors get to make the decisions.  An example of WP:RS would be this TEDickey (talk) 22:43, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

 * I am sorry to see that you repeatedly ignore facts. This is not how a scientific discussion works. Apple may have passed the test-suite but this just verifies that the test suite is incomplete and for this reason let's Mac OS X slip though... POSIX compliance means compliance to POSIX. Passing the test suite seems to be easier. BTW: the documents say: "Intel based system - default configuration", this leads to a configuration with a file system that is not POSIX compliant as it is not case sensitive. --Schily (talk) 09:12, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Lacking a WP:RS, you're still describing your WP:OR. TEDickey (talk) 09:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

 * You continue to act non-scientific by ignoring a scientific reliable source: a drescribed method to repeat things. This makes dicsussions with you aborious. Is your intention to make WP non-scientific and as a result intentionally wrong? --Schily (talk) 10:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Actually "scientific" is irrelevant for the point we're discussing. But in case it helps, you might also read Scientific consensus and Scientific standards TEDickey (talk) 10:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

 * To put this to rest, Mac OS X version 10.6 Snow Leopard for Intel based Macintosh computers is UNIX® 03 certified. Sorry, I hate OS X just as much as anyone else but it is certified. --J Grant Fox (talk) 21:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits removed WP:RS claiming that they don't exist. That includes the page from The Open Brand - Register of Certified Products for OSX 10.5, which looks (aside from date and version number) the same as the one for 10.10 (no adequate justification was given in the editor's change comment). TEDickey (talk) 23:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * If that link was in the article, it would probably not have been removed.... Note however that an OS that offers bash-3.x as the only possible shell cannot be POSIX compliant, as bash-3.0 has too many bugs and POSIX deviations - regardless of what a test suite is able to find. This has been discussed in a POSIX telephone conference when bash-4.0 was upcoming and at that time, the bash maintainer could be convinced to fix the most annoying bugs by me and David Korn as a result of a long discussion. So any Mac OS X with bash-3.x that might have received an approval slipped thorough as a result of flaws in the test suite. Also note that the default filesystem in Mac OS X is not POSIX compliant and we could not find out how Apple might have configured a system to get a POSIX compliant filesystem. Schily (talk) 08:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

As one can see, you removed the link, and as usual you continue to argue on the basis of unverifiable private conversations rather than reliable sources of information TEDickey (talk) 23:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * You two are talking at cross purposes. While you mention the difference between RS and OR over and over again, he only cares about the scientific truth. ;) 130.75.117.49 (talk) 12:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you mean something like this TEDickey (talk) 00:08, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

This discussion is irrelevant, you can change your shell, and you don't need to use make. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.60.85.179 (talk) 03:57, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

The operating system is POSIX compliant, full stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NEDM64 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

 * Unless I'm missing something, OS X is not fully POSIX compliant. It provides no implementation for unnamed semaphores (created with sem_init) and no support for POSIX message queues (no mqueue.h). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.126.21.205 (talk) 16:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

 * macOS conforms to UNIX03 (from 2003); sem_init and mqueue.h support was not mandatory until the 2008 edition. Although Apple has continued to certify newer versions of macOS, it is still certifying them as conforming to UNIX03 and not to the latest edition of POSIX. See: http://www.opengroup.org/csq/repository/noreferences=1&RID=apple%25252FXY1%25252F12.html -LiberatorG (talk) 17:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

expansion of acronym
The acronym is not defined in the given source. Also, contrary to the latest edit, it does not have any wording like "based on", but says: "The Austin Common Standards Revision Group (CSRG) is a joint technical working group established to develop and maintain the core open systems interfaces that are the POSIX® 1003.1 (and former 1003.2) standards, ISO/IEC 9945 parts 1 to 4, and the core of the Single UNIX Specification, Version 3. The approach to specification development is "write once, adopt everywhere", with the deliverables being a set of specifications that carry the IEEE POSIX designation, The Open Group's Technical Standard designation, and the ISO/IEC designation. The current set of specifications is simultaneously ISO/IEC 9945, IEEE Std 1003.1 and forms the core of the Single UNIX Specification Version 3."

Perhaps a different source would give the acronym's expansion TEDickey (talk) 21:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

I added a ref for the acronym and removed the erroneous "based on". I also tried to make the intro less awkward Bhny (talk) 08:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

General Meaning
It would be helpful to have a paragraph or two better explaining what POSIX is in practical terms. What is it for? What does it accomplish? What makes a system that is POSIX-compliant better (or worse) than other systems? Is there a drive for all operating systems to be POSIX-compliant? Why or why not? 98.218.195.190 (talk) 22:08, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I came to this article not only to find out what POSIX is - which it answered - but also to learn: why should a POSIX set of standards exist? Of what utility is it to have a POSIX and to have OSes be in compliance with it? Who finds it useful, and for what purposes? I didn't get that question answered. A brief paragraph about this, for dumb newbs like me, would be an excellent addition to the article.

I think that POSIX was created to create compatibility between all the different flavors of Unix (AIX, Solaris, etc).CameronNemo (talk) 20:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Unix 03 certification versus marketing
this edit points to marketing literature. It is reflected in somewhat older releases in the register of certified products, which has no entry for Lion TEDickey (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

 * 10.8 Mountain Lion is now on the list (as of at least 18 July 2012). Strange that 10.6 Snow Leopard is present but 10.7 Lion was skipped … 137.165.206.246 (talk) 13:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

What is most current
The article has "" statements. Something new was published in 2013. Do these statements need to be updated? ~KvnG 15:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

POSIX and G.R.O.S.S.
"'an acronym for "Portable Operating System Interface for UNIX" is reminiscent of G.R.O.S.S.. Is there a name for this kind on acronym? --Guy Macon (talk) 20:43, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Regarding these two edits, we have a bit of a conflict. IEEE Std 1003.1 calls it "Portable Operating System Interface", but the following sources call it "Portable Operating System Interface for UNIX":
 * http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc938936.aspx
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=-Mq5ve5KHXQC&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=-Mq5ve5KHXQC&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=U4H_VhJY0gIC&pg=PT613&lpg=PT613&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://www.regular-expressions.info/posix.html
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=6_Sk6DI20DoC&pg=SA15-PA4&lpg=SA15-PA4&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://manpages.bsd.lv/mdoc.html
 * http://pdf2663.cudibooks.com/unix-system-v-interface-definitions-PDF-3991420.pdf
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=trwTAdnQNZ4C&pg=PA77&lpg=PA77&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=7-XJOmNvAOkC&pg=PA466&lpg=PA466&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=jcdmKyddtJcC&pg=PA300&lpg=PA300&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=THI24xC5CUwC&pg=PA133&lpg=PA133&dq=%22Portable+Operating+System+Interface+for+Unix%22
 * http://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/idm/v2r2/topic/com.ibm.datatools.oda.install.doc/topics/c_dsa_remote.html
 * --Guy Macon (talk) 22:11, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Well, you have a choice: either use the explanation given by the people who are writing standards, or choose your own sources (there's a lot of that going on already in Wikipedia). TEDickey (talk) 22:40, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

 * No, we should go with what the majority of reliable secondary sources say. No original research applies. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:51, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

 * that's an amusing implication: that you can choose which facts to use primary sources on.  I can see lots of problems (have fun) TEDickey (talk) 23:11, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Stallman
"Richard Stallman suggested the name POSIX to the IEEE. The committee found it more easily pronounceable and memorable, so the committee adopted it." Found POSIX to be more memorable than what? either this whole sentence should be dropped, or expanded to actually matter IMO Bumblebritches57 (talk) 10:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * "POSIX" is more memorable then IEEE Std 1003.1 like "Ethernet" is more memorable then IEEE 802.3, though sadly the Wikipedia spreads bullshit again... "Bluetooth" is more memorable then IEEE 802.15.1, and "Firewire" more memorable then IEEE 1394. Sadly IEEE 802.11 has not such "more memorable name", so people call it however they want often WLAN (does it stand for "wave LAN", or really for "Wide area network"?), and – of course – the Wikipedia makes night shifts to spread half-knowledge and bullshit. User:ScotXW t@lk 07:24, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

IEEEIX/POSIX source
Actually a third-party source is preferable to a first-person recollection. Looking for one, I found this: file Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005, POSIX – Inside: A case study Jim Isaak TEDickey (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Nice finding, thank you! By "an environment that supported portability between systems" does he mean API = source-code portability or ABI = binary portability (cf. The Linux Programming Interface)? Sadly the Wikipedia is not very keen on respecting this decisive difference, especially when referring to the Windows API, the regularly mean the Windows ABI. Now how about POSIX/SUS? User:ScotXW t@lk 07:33, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

FUD
Whether the Wikipedia is used to spread and sow FUD (Fear, uncertainty and doubt) or whether there are just not enough people with the necessary knowledge willing to contribute, or both.

For example, when somebody reads all of the articles POSIX, Single UNIX Specification, UNIX and Unix-like, I doubt he will have understood the following, very simple and strait forward correlations:

 * 1) POSIX was created by the U.S. government (or the DOD) solely for procurement purposes; it is NOT an interface designed from scratch in a clean way
 * 2) The Single UNIX Specification (SUS) is a set of standards for an OS to be met, to qualify for the brand-name UNIX®.
 * 3) The specification described by POSIX and SUS are identical . Cf. "POSIX.1-2008 is simultaneously IEEE Std 1003.1™-2008 and The Open Group Technical Standard Base Specifications, Issue 7" The difference between POSIX and SUS are legal: The Open Group owns the brand-name UNIX®, to get it, you have to certify against SUS, not against, POSIX, since POSIX is a standard specified the IEEE...
 * 4) UNIX® is a registered trademark, a brand. It is used for certified operating systems compliant with the Single UNIX Specification.
 * 5) Unix-like is a term to describe operating system, that probably would comply with the Single UNIX Specification to be allowed to advertise themselves with the brand-name UNIX, but nobody payed the money to actually make sure they really do... While I personally don't mind people calling Debian, Fedora or Ubuntu "unix-like", the article Unix-like is far to long, if not superfluous. The article Linux is again total crap, its introduction should contain something like
 * 6) * The term "Linux" describes the family of Linux kernel-based operating systems, not any one operating system... the base components, such as the Linux kernel (its SCI, system call interface), the glibc, the GNU Core Utilities and some others, make many Linux operating systems "unix-like", i.e. = no money to get certified against SUS and actually get UNIX® brand-name.
 * 7) * the term "Linux-based" is braindead. It is either Linux kernel-based or simply "a Linux", another one.

First somebody has to know all of the above. Then he needs to gather references. Then he needs to do contribute to the Wikipedia and write articles, that reflect these facts in a clear language. BUT then, he needs to fight all the hard-working "Wikipedia-people" (let's not call them "contributors", since they don't contribute, they are more like, we are around, and stir the shit) that either willingly spread FUD or are simply fucking stupid. User:ScotXW t@lk 08:39, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Tandem Computers
Open standards compelled a billion dollar company to adopt a POSIX environment:

"In 1994, the NonStop Kernel was extended with a Unix-like POSIX environment called Open System Services." Xtian (talk) 11:48, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

 * That's an opinion lacking a WP:RS TEDickey (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

 * (Wikipedia topics are not a reliable source) TEDickey (talk) 23:32, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * And the claim in that page has no citation and doesn't say why Tandem added that environment, just that they did, so even if it had a citation and that citation said that they'd added that environment, it wouldn't support the claim being made here.
 * And it's not clear why that's being stated here anyway; is there something that needs to be done to the article, or is it just making a general statement about open standards that really belongs on somebody's blog or in a tweet or something? Guy Harris (talk) 00:08, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * So I took the only action really called for here - I added a reference in Tandem Computers to the claim that they came out with Open System Services, although the reference says it came out in 1995, not 1994, so I changed that as well. Maybe the statements in the cited story about it helping Tandem compete could be used to support a claim that Tandem had to do it, although it sounds as if it's more like "competitors ran UNIX", independent of POSIX, gave them the push, so maybe not.
 * In any case, I'm not sure what, if anything, more needs to be said here. Guy Harris (talk) 01:52, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Unwarranted removals.
Seven OSes (incl. QNX, BSD/OS, A/UX) have been removed even though reliable sources proved they had been certified. (e.g. http://web.archive.org/web/20120726162344/http://get.posixcertified.ieee.org/cert_prodlist.tpl) They should go back, perhaps with a note mentioning that they are not currently certified. Agree/disagree?--Elvey(t•c) 02:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Agreed - reliable sources are the way to go. TEDickey (talk) 07:06, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

 * BSD/OS and A/UX most likely have never been certified as they are very old. Note that before SUSv2, the certification was a joke as there have been successful attempts to prevent important parameters from appearing in the POSIX standard and as a result, passing the certification was not worth anything. This is why governmental sites asked for the SUS as an enhancement standard. If you can send reliable sources for something that fully passed at least SUSv2, you are welcome. Note that your URL verifies that e.g. Integrity did not pass a full test and thus is only partially POSIX compliant. You see, sources need to be read carefully. Schily (talk) 12:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The section on certified systems has been split into a section for currently-certified systems and formerly-certified systems. All entries have citations, most of which point to the Open Group pages (or that IEEE page that lists some real-time systems, namely Green Hills' INTEGRITY and Wind River Systems' VxWorks).  I added archived URLs pointing to the Wayback Machine  for OSes that were certified but that the Open Group site doesn't currently list; I have no idea why it currently lists SCO OpenServer and UnixWare, which were registered on 3 May 1995 and 16 May 2003, respectively, but doesn't include Solaris.  The oldest version of posixcertified.ieee.org in the Wayback Machine says
 * "POSIX Certified by the IEEE and The Open Group is a voluntary program jointly administered by the IEEE and The Open Group, open to any product meeting the conformance requirements. Anticipated to be launched in November 2003, the program will certify products to the 2003 Edition of IEEE 1003.1™-2001, "Standard for Information Technology--Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX)" which incorporates the IEEE 1003.1 Corrigendum."

 * so it appears that the certification process might not have existed when those two products were registered. Ownership of the trademark "UNIX" was given to X/Open in 1993; I'm not sure what the registration process involved prior to the certification program, but perhaps there was no requirement for re-registration and systems registered prior to that point were allowed to remain registered forever, whereas if your system is registered and certified it gets un-registered if the certification expires.
 * That does raise the question about whether anything registered before November 2003 is certified, and thus whether we should speak of being registered rather than certified, or whether we should remove anything registered without being certified. Guy Harris (talk) 05:52, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

BSD sockets as "POSIX"
An editor appears to equate BSD sockets with POSIX. Actually, POSIX is not synonymous. For start, read the POSIX documentation. Whether Winsock is POSIX-compliant is not addressed by the comments in the FAQ; a suitable source has not been provided. TEDickey (talk) 00:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, BSD sockets and POSIX sockets are not synonymous; however, the former is an earlier revision of the API on which both POSIX and Windows sockets are based. Whereas POSIX mostly adopted BSD socket interface as is (with extensive additions and only minor alterations like header files), the sources make it clear that Winsock has significantly diverged from BSD sockets, and that these differences remain (despite, one might argue, adopting some later POSIX additions like getaddrinfo and other IPv6-enabled functions/structs). Therefore the cited sources are adequate (if not the best suitable) to support the claim that Winsock is not POSIX-compliant. 165.190.169.43 (talk) 02:03, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

 * The argument lacks substance. The statement is original research as it is written and sourced. TEDickey (talk) 07:57, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

 * TBH I don't see this statement as controversial, as any socket programmer (and given the sources, any competent reader) should be able to verify its truth, even if the statement does (strictly speaking) constitute a synthesis—assuming the distinction between BSD and POSIX sockets is practically necessary here (which it isn't, in my opinion). So to me, the statement "Winsock does not conform to POSIX" falls into "The Pope is Catholic" category. But perhaps it's just me; do you actually challenge this statement and mean to argue that Winsock is POSIX-compliant, or that controversy exists about its POSIX compliance status? 86.3.108.209 (talk) 12:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Actually, any competent programmer should be able to provide a suitable source, since this is the sort of detail-oriented thing that programmers are adept at. Combining sources to state something not explicitly in the sources is (besides being outside the guidelines), counter to the premise of competence. If you find a competent programmer, they'll have to agree. TEDickey (talk) 23:32, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Unfortunately, competent programmers' suitable sources (besides manuals, standards pubs, and occasionally textbooks) include experience, knowledge, and source-code-sharing resources generally not accepted by Wikipedia as reliable, such as stackoverflow, github, habrahabr, etc. Like so: . Then, there are university and training courses, conferences, etc, where the attribution of a particular statement to a particular source may not be verifiable at all. Most programmers I know are practical people, they are not keen on excessive pedantry as it's counterproductive in a work environment, so personal experience (and that of colleagues) usually counts as a suitable source, as long as it's repeatable/verifiable. They are also engineers, which means combining various sources of knowledge is anything but contrary to competence; in fact this is a prerequisite for it. All this is probably beside the point here (I only mention it because you brought it up).
 * My other point still stands: given the sources, the conclusion only counts as synthesis if we actually need to distinguish BSD and POSIX sockets for the purpose of the statement, which (all things considered) I don't think we do. If we don't, then the sentence "There are a limited number of instances where Windows Sockets has diverted from strict adherence to the Berkeley conventions" or "In two cases it was necessary to rename functions that are used in Berkeley Sockets in order to avoid clashes with other Microsoft Windows API functions" is about as clear a statement of non-compliance as we can expect from Microsoft. Additionally, I am yet to hear anything, sourced or unsourced, which challenges the statement itself (as opposed to its attribution). So I suggest we leave the statement as is until a competent programmer joins the discussion does so. If you are still unhappy about equating BSD sockets with POSIX sockets here, we could change "POSIX-compliant implementations" to read "Berkeley-based socket implementations", but IMO this would only serve to confuse the reader. 86.3.108.209 (talk) 20:37, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

 * That's a lot of words which in summary attempts to put words into my mouth. TEDickey (talk) 00:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Namely? 86.3.108.209 (talk) 02:42, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm looking for an actual reliable source which supports the statement you made in the topic, and have not seen any credible discussion on it so far. TEDickey (talk) 00:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The sources referenced are as reliable and appropriate as can be reasonably expected on this topic, and they are adequate to support the statement made. The "lot of words" was to show why I believe so; since you disagree, it was an attempt to get a two-way dialogue going, where I could hear out your objections and reassess my view, possibly conclude that the statement should be edited or removed. But since I never heard any relevant objections, I maintain my position. If you still disagree with the edit as unsourced/unverifiable (in Wikipedia's sense), then I suggest requesting a third opinion. 86.3.108.209 (talk) 02:42, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Since your proposed source relies upon personal interpretation, you might consider lining up another anonymous editor to provide your opinion. TEDickey (talk) 10:38, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Before anyone posits a third opinion...
...Are both IPs the same person? If so, registering an account would avoid further confusion.  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 04:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep. I was logged in through a proxy and forgot about it; sorry for the confusion. 86.3.108.209 (talk) 18:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Well, the general consideration of professional specifics is secondary here; the primary concern is whether the information presented actually qualifies as synthesis. So in short, you believe we do need to distinguish between POSIX (as a standard) and BSD sockets (as a convention) here, and therefore consider this information synthesis? 86.3.108.209 (talk) 18:16, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

POSIX - 2017
I've changed both the 2008 and the 2017 sections. I went to The Open Group website, and from there to IEEE's and confirmed that the current ( as of 7.22.2018) standard is 1003.1-2017. I know virtually *nothing* about this other than what little I read here and there, so I did not move the bulk of the 2008 section's prose down to the 2017 section, although I suspect that the structure has remained the same (but I didn't confirm that) and, if so, it (the description of the documents involved) should be cut and pasted into the 2017 section, imho. I leave that for someone who knows more about it.75.90.39.77 (talk) 14:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Dead References & External Links
References:
 * 1) [1] "POSIX.1 FAQ". -- Links to POSIX.1-2017 FAQ, but 'article date' is 2011. Proposal: move it to access date.
 * 2) [3] "POSIX". Standards. IEEE. -- Links to invalid page. The original author needs to update this link, because it does not specify which POSIX version this link used to point to, and the URL does not show what version.
 * 3) [15] "POSIX Certification". IEEE. -- Doesn't make sense: Links to list of certified entities for 1003.1 (2003), not an explanation of the certification process for the current version.
 * 4) [15] and [27] are duplicates. Reduce or clarify.
 * 5) [16] "POSIX Certified by IEEE and The Open Group - Program Guide". -- Unclear title. Links to a section header in the source article, but is listed as the full article. Section header linked to is "2. How to Achieve Certification". Advise removing "#Howto" from the URL.

External Links: Rj.amdphreak (talk) 08:26, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) "POSIX Certification Authority". IEEE. -- Links to invalid page. Duplicate of [3]
 * [1]: I updated the article date to reflect the current state, and added an access date. I then combined the two references to the POSIX FAQ into one.
 * [3]: Now [2]. It now points to "P1003.1 - Standard for Information Technology--Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX(TM)) Base Specifications, Issue 8".
 * [15]: Now [16]. It's attached to "Certified products can be found at the IEEE's website.", and it does, indeed, demonstrate that "Certified products can be found at the IEEE's website.", as it's the page on the IEEE website that shows some certified products.  I have no idea why it only lists certifications for "POSIX 1003.1-2003" and "PSE52 Realtime Controller 1003.13-2003 System", and not the more-currently-relevant "1003.1™-2016 Base".  The page at https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/index2.html for The Open Brand lists "The full register of certified products" for brands such as "UNIX V7" (confusing name of the day :-)) and "UNIX 03"; the latter list includes non-INTEGRITY systems but doesn't list INTEGRITY.  Maybe there's "POSIX" certification and "UNIX" certification.  Perhaps the claim about "certified products" should simply be removed.
 * [27]: Now [22]. It's attached to "INTEGRITY", and it happens to support the claim that Green Hills' INTEGRITY is certified for "POSIX 1003.1-2003".
 * [16]: Now [17]. It's attached to "This means that they passed the automated conformance tests." Section 2.3.1 "Authorized Test Suites" seems to be the section that refers to the tests, but the claim is about what certification means, with "Formal testing and submission of results" being the final step, so going to "How to Achieve Certification" makes sense; the reference should use "at=" to indicate that it's going to a particular sentence. Done.
 * External link: the page isn't "invalid" in the sense of being a 404 error or something such as that; perhaps the link was updated. It's not a duplicate of what used to be [3] and is now [2].  The title of the link now matches the page's title. Guy Harris (talk) 23:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

UNIX certification and POSIX certification
The Open Group and the IEEE have a POSIX certification program. The Open Group also has a UNIX certification program.

The Certified Product Registers page on The Open Group website has separate links for UNIX and POSIX certification.

I infer that Green Hills' INTEGRITY was only submitted for POSIX certification, as it doesn't appear on the UNIX Certified Products page; it only appears on the POSIX certified Products page.

I presume that anything that passes the UNIX test suites is POSIX conforming, as the specifications are, as far as I know, the same; I don't know whether it would officially be considered POSIX certified, however. If not, our lists of POSIX-certified and formerly POSIX-certified systems would need to be fixed.

I'm not sure whether any system that passes the POSIX test suites could fail the UNIX test suites - if the tests suites are the same, they couldn't. I'm not sure why a vendor would go for POSIX certification rather than UNIX certification, unless, for example, the trademark licensing terms are different, they prefer the POSIX terms, and don't need to be able to use the UNIX trademark. Guy Harris (talk) 01:36, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

FIPS-151 certification
My understanding is that the various FIPS-151 standards were based on the POSIX standards, but controlled by the US government (specifically NIST). Should operating systems certified as POSIX-compliant according to NIST standards be listed in this article, or is this purely about operating systems certified according to the Open Group POSIX? Is there a value in this distinction? Vt320 (talk) 10:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

What are the "Process Triggers", which are supposedly part of POSIX.1-1988 supposed to be?
In my FIPS 151-1, IEEE Std 1003.1-1988 PDF, "trigger" doesn't appear once. I'm not aware of anything remotely similar in modern POSIX ("trigger" appears, but as prose for behaviours being triggered by something happening), or in any contemporary UNIX. What is it supposed to be? Nabijaczleweli (talk) 18:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

 * This seems to be added in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=POSIX&diff=prev&oldid=325453366 with no comment and no source.
 * I'm reverting this.
 * The same applies to "I/O Port Interface and Control" which appears in original https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=POSIX&diff=prev&oldid=29248632 addition. What could it possibly mean? Nabijaczleweli (talk) 18:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:POSIX


text:
NASCAR Racing 2003 Season

NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, or NR2003 for short, is a computer racing simulator released in February 2003 by Papyrus Design Group for Windows and Mac OS X. The game was the last to be released by the company before EA Sports bought the NASCAR license exclusively from 2004 to 2009 (parent company Sierra's successor company, Activision Blizzard, reacquired NASCAR rights in 2011, with NASCAR The Game: 2011). The game included all of the 2003 NASCAR season tracks and many of the drivers, including Dave Blaney, who was absent in NASCAR Thunder 2004.

Gameplay
NASCAR Racing 2003 Season contains 42 Winston Cup teams that were anticipated to run throughout the season, with the exception of the cars from Chip Ganassi Racing, as well as 23 Winston Cup series tracks, putting the player behind the wheel of a NASCAR stock car. Players are able to choose between testing sessions, offline single racing, championship, and multiplayer options as well as car setup choices.

Ownership
At the end of March 2004, NR2003 was pulled from shelves when Electronic Arts acquired the exclusive NASCAR rights. In May 2004, Papyrus was shut down, and David Kaemmer bought the source code and assets a couple months later for his company FIRST, LLC where it became the base code for iRacing. In 2007, Sierra, the game's publishers, shut down the online servers.

Reception
The game received "generally favorable reviews", according to the review aggregation website Metacritic.

According to Edge, the game sold at least 100,000 units in the U.S., but was beaten by NASCAR Racing 4's 260,000 sales in the region. Total US sales of NASCAR Racing computer games released in the 2000s reached 900,000 units by August 2006.

The game won PC Gamer US' 2003 "Best Racing Game" award. The magazine's Andy Mahood wrote that it "established a daunting new standard for PC racing simulations that may take years to eclipse".

title: NASCAR Racing 2003 Season


text:
Honeycomb cowfish

The honeycomb cowfish (Acanthostracion polygonius) belongs to family Ostraciidae. It is also known simply as the trunkfish or cowfish.

Description
The honeycomb cowfish has armor-like, hexagonal scales covering most of its body. It is named for its unique honeycomb-like pattern and "horns". This pattern helps the fish to blend in with coral reefs. Most honeycomb cowfish tend to be blue in color, but can also be yellow, gray, or green. Juveniles are generally more colorful than adults. They have no pelvic fins, and the caudal fin is rounded.

Honeycomb cowfish have several modified bony scales and "horns." These serve as a means of protection. Honeycomb cowfish can be distinguished from similar fish by the two spines above their eyes and hexagonal pattern. Compared to other boxfish, the honeycomb cowfish has a smaller, protruding mouth and fleshy lips.

The maximum body length is 50 centimeters, but the average length is 25 centimeters.

Distribution
This species is distributed throughout the western Atlantic, the Caribbean Sea, and waters near Brazil. They are absent throughout most of the Gulf of Mexico, but there are populations around Florida.

Habitat
The honeycomb cowfish lives in warm, clear waters near coral reefs, sea grass beds, and in estuaries. It is an uncommon and cautious species.

Behavior
Honeycomb cowfish are usually solitary, but can be seen in groups of threes consisting of one male and two females. Little is known about their reproduction, but they are known to mate in open water. They have been observed quickly swimming to the surface in pairs, releasing their gametes, and quickly swimming back down.

Honeycomb cowfish have the ability to change color in order to protect themselves from predation. Once camouflaged, the fish can remain stationary for long periods of time.

The juveniles have better swimming abilities than adults due to their rounder bodies.

Diet
Feeding occurs during the day. Their diet consists of small marine invertebrates including shrimp, sponges, algae, tunicates, and worms.

Human Use
The honeycomb cowfish is considered to be a valuable food fish. It is marketed fresh, and is prized in the Caribbean where it is abundant. There have been several reports of ciguatera poisoning from the consumption of this fish. It is also sold commercially as an aquarium fish.

title: Honeycomb cowfish


text: File:Balkandji probujdane cover.jpg

title: File:Balkandji probujdane cover.jpg