Truly Understanding the "Unix Philosophy" - Psychology, Philosophy, and Licenses
Users browsing this thread: 14 Guest(s)
|
|||
(13-09-2016, 04:27 PM)jkl Wrote:Quote:I guess we're not all enough die-hard unix people to give up all that for a near-perfect system.Who said Unix can't do that? It maybe can, and probably even better, but my experience shows that the suckiness of a system correlates with general support (software support, web-browsers, games, drivers). (13-09-2016, 04:28 PM)venam Wrote: But you'd be suprised how not Unixy they feel to most people and how stuck you can feel using those systems. Interesting. I thought the BSDs were certified systems as well. But okay, I care more about where the food is on my plate than about the question whether or not my system is a certified unix. I mean, nobody needs a fortran compiler, amirite? (13-09-2016, 08:18 PM)rocx Wrote: There's also GNU to praise/blame (depending on your outlook of free software and/or GNU's rather dismal code quality) for the rise of Linux. Perhaps we're better off with it rising than if it didn't. Who knows? I think we wouldn't be better off. If you perceive them as a political movement and not a technological one, they have done great work, spreading the idea of freedom of information, convincing the BSD guys to go open source, and establishing the four laws of free software. Technologically, I don't think we would be off better, I am convinced that at all points in time, 90% (95%?) of all software was shitty. (13-09-2016, 08:18 PM)rocx Wrote: Even they knew UNIX had its flaws and were on the project to fix them.Right. They saw the flaws and attempted to fix them, beginning of the 90's. Now, how outdated is unix today? How many unfixed warts are left? What could be improved? |
|||