From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dave <dave@dave2.dave.tj>
Subject: Re: [9fans] blanks in file names
In-reply-to: <3D32E1FC.4060600@nas.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Message-id: <200207211952.g6LJqEu14344@dave2.dave.tj>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:52:14 -0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: d35a2066-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

I happen to dislike much about rio, but that's not a fundamental part
of the OS; it's simply a shell (and a very good one, too, which is why
you're not likely to see me rushing to replace it).  FWIW, though, I can
easily imagine a vi-like or emacs-like environment with a framebuffer
back-end doing the job just fine, without rodents, and without losing
any functionality.

 - Dave


Jack Johnson wrote:
> 
> Geoff Collyer wrote:
> > One downside of APE is that it's made some people think of Plan 9 as
> > Just Another Goddamned Unix Implementation.
> 
> Is this what Dave meant when he wrote:
>  > /me shudders at the thought that GUIs might someday take over the
>  > world :-(
> 
> ?
> 
> For the record, I think Plan 9 is a textual GUI.  Though you could 
> probably swing it with a bare rc shell, unless you can run it on a 
> braille term (or hear it through your speakers) it's probably safest to 
> call it a GUI.
> 
> At this point, I guess I'm thankful that there are no Olfactory User 
> Interfaces (though paradoxically I've seen a few that stank).
> 
> I did read somewhere that there's a braille term that can draw out 
> window regions.  A variation of acme on something like that could be 
> interesting.  Mouse actions would take some serious rethought, though.
> 
> -Jack
>