Re: [9fans] sad commentary

[Eris Discordia <eris.discordia@gmail.com>]

> this blog-style opinion piece does not offer anything constructive.
> for example, would utf-8 qualify as a functionality that didn't exist
> before plan9?

The fact the UTF-8 was first "implemented" on Plan 9 has nothing to do with
Plan 9's funtionality as an OS. Similarly, the fact that Windows is "still"
the best platform if you need to do word processing in many languages has
nothing to do with its comparatively low performance with many
applications--an important OS functionality it lacks.

FreeBSD's very good process scheduling, which manifests to a user like me
in not having to worry about a non-responsive system in case a process is
poorly performing, "is" an OS funtionality.

If the availability of UTF-8 is an advantage, the absence of a single
Unicode font in the system useful for non-Latin languages is a very strong
disadvantage. UTF-8 in an English-only "user" paradigm is only
extravagance. I even doubt there's a "simple" way of inputting, say, Hebrew
or Arabic in Plan 9. It'll be kind of you to clarify that point for me if
I'm mistaken.

> what's sad is that unless there's a dummy's guide to
> something, that something is not considered a success.

The question is what new function Plan 9, as an OS, defines for the end
user. Does it enable me of doing something Windows doesn't? Does it enable
me of doing something better than I could do on FreeBSD? Does its default
GUI even match Windows in ease of use (read: switching to another window,
killing the window you're running, doing a simple copy without typing in
regexps/wildcards, et cetera)?

By the way, I provided a description of my person to avoid "dummy" labels.
I may well be a "dummy" in your league but that doesn't mean I'm unable of
reading a normal technical manual. I can do and have done that, on Linux,
FreeBSD, and Plan 9.

And success, by definition, doesn't need an apology. When there's an
apology there must have been a measure of failure.

Best wishes,
Eris Discordia

--On Monday, June 30, 2008 1:42 PM -0700 Skip Tavakkolian
<9nut@9netics.com> wrote:

>> Plan 9 neither fulfills
>> previous functions nor defines new ones for any "end user" or even
>> "hobbyist," except perhaps the most sturdy of them.
>
> this blog-style opinion piece does not offer anything constructive.
> for example, would utf-8 qualify as a functionality that didn't exist
> before plan9?
>
> there are many plan9 ideas that have been adopted by other os --
> though the results often are Frankenstein-esque.
>
>> Eris Discordia
>>
>> P.S. Heck, this "is" some sad commentary.
>
> what's sad is that unless there's a dummy's guide to
> something, that something is not considered a success.
>
> -Skip
>
>