>>936403
>holy shit this might be the one hafway decent point you've made in the entire time you've been shitting up this board.
Most of my points are decent, but at least we can agree on one of them.
>I'd like to extend an olive branch on this point, highlighting that this was actually a part of the original UNIX philosophy. I know, I know, you're not gonna like the idea of actually appreciating anything related to UNIX, but hear me out.
It was part of the original UNIX philosophy, and it's a good thing, but not anymore. UNIX could have gone another way and evolved into something better than Multics if they threw away parts that sucked, but that's not what happened. Plan 9 is a partial attempt at fixing UNIX, but it doesn't go far enough. Fixed UNIX is called Multics.
>>Design and build software, even operating systems, to be tried early, ideally within weeks.
This is usually a good thing to do, but most programming languages are much better for this than C. C was bad for the 70s, maybe acceptable if you have 16 KB of RAM on a 16-bit computer, but it's a huge waste of time and money. A lot of projects are delayed or never finished because of C, like the F-35 and all those microkernels from the 90s.
>Don't hesitate to throw away the clumsy parts and rebuild them.
That was true in UNIX a long time ago, like when the Bourne shell replaced the Thompson shell, but the philosophy changed long before UNIX-HATERS was written.
>And your quote is right that there may very well be a cultural problem at hand. I couldn't really say whether it actually exists or to what extent, (that's a whole separate debate entirely), but hey, at least we're getting somewhere.
A lot of UNIX weenies respond to criticism of UNIX by blaming the user, but other cultures tend to fix problems, like FORTRAN and BASIC line numbers. Some programmers didn't think it was a problem, but many did.
>>936496
Stallman copied UNIX because he believed users have baby duck syndrome. He might be right, but he still went after UNIX weenies instead of DOS users or Lisp machine users.
I predict that you will be programming an MSDOS machine
within 5 years.
Yeesh, that's pretty grim. I'm programming an MSDOS-machine
*now*, but it's running Windows 3.0. Windows 3 has
``orderly'' shared memory, an application-oriented IPC
mechanism that many programs already exploit in a meaningful
way, and shared libraries -- when will the *n* different
versions of Unix get them ?
Oh yeah, and it might not be the world's most flexible
window system, but at least you know what you get when
you're running Windows.
The real story is that by the time the Unix camps get
together, there will be a large portion of users out there
who will be doing hairy real-world things without the
``help'' of Unix. Already, PCs and Macs help run
long-distance phone services and produce magazines -- not
``computer'' magazines but real magazines like Spy, Wigwag,
and the Source.
Unix is best for hacking Unix utilities. Of course, the
Lisp Machine was a far better machine for meta-hacking.
Unix is poor choice for end-users on one hand and pure
hackers on the other...