Am 10. Sep, 2000 schwäzte Lucas Vogel so:
> Interesting: Eric Raymond is listed in the Unix Haters acknowledgements.
So is Paul Rubin. Isn't he PeeWee Herman?
M. Strata Rose is on the USENIX SAGE mailing list and if I remember
correctly has sent in some good info.
Jamie Zawinski, however, might really hate *NIX, which might explain some
of Netscape's mail probs under *NIX.
Simson Garfinkel (co-wrote O'Reilly *NIX security book) being editor is
interesting. Some of his more recent articles make me wonder about him
writing a security book, though.
Also note that the list was started in '87 by a bunch of lisp machine fans
(I'm certain Raymond is a big fan of emacs and lisp). Also note that
they're complaints are basic complaints of *NIX people having to move over
to some desktop OS :).
> A brief look at electronics shows that in the beginning, products
> were built quite simply, yet built so that people had easy access to the
> insides. As manufacturing techniques and technology progressed those same
> products had more and more features, and became more complicated over time.
> But another noticeable difference was that the insides of the component
> weren't as easy to get to as they used to.
Much of this, in my opinion, has been to force people to replace or "seek
professional help" to work on the items. For a blender, it's not that big
of a deal, but for larger household electronics (refrigerators, washing
machines, etc.) and cars it is a big deal. The spark plugs being worn out
is not a valid reason to toss the car and get a new one or even to replace
the engine ( can we way reinstall ;-). I can agree that maybe only those
with the proper tools who understand their use should muck with the
computer system that maintains a fuel-injected system, but many other
things can be done. Also, why shouldn't someone be able to learn how to
tune the fuel-injection system. If I travelled up north to Flag regularly
it might well be worth my while to tune my engine for Phx or Flag
conditions :).
> incompatible with other operating systems. I would say that Microsoft's
> troubles have more to do with its business practices than its user
> interface.
This is my main beef with them. Personally, I also think the user
interface is massively borken and can't stand to use it ( it's like
instant ms (multiple-schlerosis) to me ). I have the freedom (as in
speech) to choose to use something else. Same as someone else has the
freedom to use m$. If m$ would use Open Formats and adhere to Open
Standards someone else using m$ OS or apps wouldn't matter to me. As long
as m$ doesn't adhere to standards, others using it is a clear step in the
wrong direction and should be discouraged. Same for most any other
software that uses proprietary formats[1].
ciao,
der.hans
[1] esr's example of the log cutting software is a good example of where
closed source and in this case proprietary formats probably make sense and
don't matter, e.g. non-common application in a very small market
segment. Documentation writing and sharing is very common and applies to
most market segments.
--
#
der.hans@LuftHans.com home.pages.de/~lufthans/
www.Opnix.com
# Like the maid, I don't do (M$)Windows. - der.hans
(text/plain)