From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <56a297000703132213y1feea5c4u637c0b8f1208033@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:13:15 +0900 From: "Noah Evans" 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 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <56a297000703132126x4ffcad00s70f85c25815fbae8@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 2256e724-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Lots of people. That's the problem. I'm not advocating doo-dads, I'm just saying that's fundamentally where I think a lot of the resistance to Plan 9 is coming from. A large percentage of the OS hobbyists are vain. They would rather have something like gnome or kde than something like rio because it looks "cool." Noah On 3/14/07, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote: > > I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I > > was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm > > willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts > > and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it > > would disappear. > > But that is all computing time that could be better spent elsewhere. > Who actually wants their machine to run no faster than a 4.7MHz IBM > PC-Clone, albeit a very snazzy looking one? > > ++L > >