From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lucio De Re To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] more fossil woes Message-ID: <20031111115906.B6815@cackle.proxima.alt.za> References: <58c9b7013b68f3902cb73b4baa9ef25e@plan9.ucalgary.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Richard Miller on Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:16:46AM +0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:59:06 +0200 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 86e5ef2e-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:16:46AM +0000, Richard Miller wrote: > > > (a > > decent OS which is comfortable to work with, if a bit spartan) > > s/if/because/ > > spartan => easy to understand => comfortable to work with > > IMHO. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but spartan is more or less the opposite of opulent, implying a shortage of comforts. The bit about "easy to understand" does not follow from "spartan", nor, to be frank, does it make much of a premiss for "comfortable to work with". So which is it: Spartan or comfortable? I think the latter, because the real needs are addressed and no attempt at satisfying the artificial needs (curse that browser!) has come along to bloat the base architecture. I guess that means that Plan 9 may seem spartan to those who are not entirely sold on its fundamentals. No offence intended, of course. ++L