From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 00:48:15 +0100 From: Eris Discordia To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <7DD53D7E8CD0E762B9896B7C@[192.168.1.2]> In-Reply-To: References: <422c2c66f1d93f0928ca31b8c1e0c927@hamnavoe.com> <7d3530220909050736h693c665ere5b8346c4569c7e1@mail.gmail.com> <94598C5B08083F783ECB103E@[192.168.1.2]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: [9fans] nice quote Topicbox-Message-UUID: 65b3fc66-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > Using your theories, please explain why Lisp and Plan 9 both hover around > the same level of popularity (i.e., not very, but not dead either). I don't think I can say anything in that respect that cannot either be=20 easily refuted or greatly improved upon by someone already reading this=20 list and just too busy with their own stuff to post. Some of them=20 explicitly avoid feeding the troll (that I be, supposedly). Anyway, here's what I think: Plan 9 and LISP are different, evolutionarily. = LISP seems to me like a downsized reptile that has survived and been forced = to exist in the shadow of mammals after the Mesozoic while Plan 9 looks=20 more like a lemur. A rather recently developed mammal driven into a small=20 area by its close kin from a common ancestor. And one primary note: I have come to understand, in part thanks to this=20 very list, that popularity isn't really a good measure of merit for=20 computer stuff but you asked about popularity so I'll try to focus on that. = (Case in point, there's a lot I read about on this list that I don't think=20 I'd hear about in a lifetime, and this isn't a popular list.) ********** LISP evolved in a parallel path to the line of languages that descended=20 from ALGOL. It represented/represents a programming paradigm--whose=20 significance is beyond me but visible to CS people--and it used to also=20 embody an application area. That application area, at the time, overlapped=20 with the ambitions of some of the best experts in computation. LISP gained=20 momentum, became an academic staple, was the pride and joy of world's best=20 CS/CE departments. The application area got hit but the programming=20 paradigm was strong as before. The paradigm has scientific value--which is again beyond me but I trust CS=20 people on that--so it continues to be taught at world's best CS/CE=20 departments and to up-and-coming programmers and future computer=20 scientists. SICP is witness to that. In the academy, LISP will live on as=20 long as the paradigm it's attached to lives on and is deemed significant.=20 Those same people who are educated in some dialect of LISP, as well as=20 other languages, found businesses and apply their knowledge; occasionally,=20 by way of their training in LISP. For whatever reason they see merit in it=20 that many self-educated programmers or those trained at lesser institutions = don't. Obviously, there aren't that many top CS/CE departments and those=20 with founder status or strongly influences by founder institutions are=20 still fewer. Hence, LISP's living dead state: "popularity" among the elite. = Mind you, the natural divide between the two groups can sometimes be a=20 cause of resentment and get non-LISP people badmouthing it. ********** Plan 9, on the other hand, was supposed to be a drop-in successor to=20 UNIX--a natural step forward. It was supposed to satisfy long-time UNIX=20 users by deceiving them with a similar-looking toolset while implementing a = large change of philosophy whose impact would only become clear after=20 (previous) UNIX users had already settled in. The factors that kept it from = actually replacing UNIX everywhere are many. One factor was timing. It reached various tiers of "ignorant masses" when=20 not one but multiple possible continuations of UNIX, all of them FOSS, had=20 already gained foothold (GNU/Linux and *BSD). The other factor was its overly complex arrangement compared to the mundane = purposes of lowly creatures more or less like me. I have tried arguing why=20 Plan 9 as it is is a hassle on desktop systems and have been met with=20 criticism that mostly targeted my lack of computer aptitude in general=20 rather than my argument. I stressed what I termed "conceptual complexity"=20 of Plan 9's model of how things should be and the lack of _any_ user=20 friendly, albeit sane, abstraction on top of that complexity. A third, more important, factor is that it was advocated to people who=20 probably couldn't understand how Plan 9 would serve them better than things = they heard of more regularly, where was this new thing's edge that=20 justified the cost of its adoption. I for one am still at a loss on that=20 matter. As a hobbyist, I lurk, and occasionally--they say--troll, around=20 here but I'm not keeping my huge media collection on a Plan 9 installation=20 or using Acme for entering multi-lingual (up to three languages until a=20 while ago, four recently) text. Either task would be extremely cumbersome=20 to do on Plan 9 (and this really has little to do with the OS itself). In=20 short, I won't be doing Plan 9 because it's Plan 9. I, and most of the=20 lowly ones, need further justification that either hasn't been presented or = is way above my, or our, head. The fourth factor I can think of is Plan 9's owners' attitude towards it. I = once dared go as far as saying it was actually "jettisoned." For reasons=20 that are beyond me Plan 9 isn't seeing much attention from Bell Labs or its = creators. It currently seems to lack the Benevolent Dictator for Life=20 figure many FOSS projects have. The overall air around it is one of=20 dereliction even if it is in fact being actively worked on behind the=20 scenes. Whether this is desired is again beyond me. As a final note I think I should draw your attention to Linux's and *BSD's=20 path of ascendancy. All of these OSs seem to have consecutively attracted=20 distinct groups of users: serious programmers/contributors/researchers,=20 startups, the pleb (that's my kind), and corporate users--in that specific=20 order. Plan 9 seems to have stopped at stage 2 (startups), or maybe it's=20 just progressing and I am unaware of the progress. Regardless, attracting=20 the pleb seems to be the key to entering corporate user market and=20 widespread popularity, i.e. the stage where corporations, hoping to win the = pleb or higher pleb (industries and businesses), are willing to sponsor=20 (read: bribe) universities, students, and their own R&D departments in=20 teaching, learning, and furthering the new thing's cause. ********** I must stress again these are all my impressions; hallucinations, if you=20 will. --On Saturday, September 05, 2009 13:30 -0600 Daniel Lyons=20 wrote: > Eris, > > Using your theories, please explain why Lisp and Plan 9 both hover around > the same level of popularity (i.e., not very, but not dead either). > > =E2=80=94 > Daniel Lyons > >