% The point is this: there is a
> significant difference between a desktop
> operating system that is "Unix-based,",
> and Unix that has a "desktop
> environment" running on top of it. OS X
> is the former and Unix/Linux is the
I think you miss the point. An OS does not depend on its category based on a few user modifiable switches. Windows, no matter how many registry entries you change will never be a UNIX (though it can be made to run UNIX programs). Mac OS X, by flipping off the Aqua environment, and setting it to start up into console mode or X-Windows, certainly looks and acts like most UNIX variants available to the common man. Thus, it is a UNIX.
The problem isn't that you can't get a loosely integrated desktop environment, you can, and any mac sysadmin who knows OS X (including me) would be happy to show you how for a fee. The problem is that nobody has been able to accomplish a tightly integrated user interface that is suitable for non-technical people to romp around. That's the technical challenge that Apple took up.
Apple's done it and shipped that configuration as default. And as I said before, flipping a few config bits to turn on one server and not another does not shift an OS either into or out of the UNIX camp.
For some people, a compiler and all the other developer tools are overkill. They don't install the tools. Developers install the developer tools. Gee, what a hassle. You might have to spend a minute before you go out for lunch. Oooh!
Can I open the terminal and type in ps -a, top, or kill -9 without the dev tools? These seem like UNIX behaviors to me and I recall that Terminal.app isn't a dev tool only program.
Defending bad arguments just makes you look worse, cut your losses and move on.