From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:20:15 +0200 From: Harri Haataja To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno Message-ID: <20070316082014.GA17128@paju.oulu.fi> References: <9ab217670703151136g79dc5cebt749fede7973f02e6@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Topicbox-Message-UUID: 264dc17c-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 09:28:00PM +0200, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote: > As I see little merit in making another Windows of Plan 9, even via > the Linux route, I prefer the second option. Also, I don't understand > the benefits of the first option: when I want Linux, NetBSD or > Windows, I have them all at my fingertips, at least in one version. IF you wanted to look at the popularity aspect, bit by bit a Windows was made of Linux in order to get a wider audience. In replacing NT servers in small shops sneakily and making firewalls, print servers, web servers etc, it worked fine. In the current desktop horrors, maybe not. A lot of doors were opened to all kinds of systems. Doing similiar with plan9 might mean that there could be small plan9 servers doing those back of the closet jobs. I really like that goal. Another thing might be trying to get everywhere, including glossy desktops. Looking at Linux today, that might be a very risky route. Then there's the compatibility. You might have to stick with some system or such just because of one app (Excel, Photoshop, Firefox...) and that's a miserable state IMO/E. Maybe Xen will make that a lot easier than before.