From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "William Staniewicz" To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Future of Plan9 Message-ID: <20001220195936.B199@localhost.local> References: <91nt3g$t2f$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <200012200058.AAA18825@whitecrow.demon.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200012200058.AAA18825@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>; from steve@whitecrow.demon.co.uk on Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 12:58:51AM +0000 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 19:59:36 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3acba78a-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 12:58:51AM +0000, Steve Kilbane wrote: > > I like Plan9, I think it has good draft - networking, security, > > namespace (good idea!)... > > But now it needs applications. I am still very much at the early learning stage of understanding the full potential of plan9. But on a gut level, the word that comes to mind is "minimalism". What I mean by this is that if something is not really needed, why have it. Acme is cool too. I use MWM on my FreeBSD partition and like it for being simple. Eventually, I would like to set up a home network and run it as it was designed but for now I am just getting a feel for the terrain. It might be fun to have something like "micq" but it's not necessary. Bill