Re: [9fans] Ideas from Plan-9

[Blake McBride <blake@mcbride.name>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3657 bytes --]

I, respectfully, disagree.  The end purpose of any OS, platform, or program
is to perform some sort of function.  That end function is called an app.
 An app can be targeted at a programmer or a dumb user. The underlying
environment (including tools) determines the available facilities a
programmer has in order to construct said app.  Unix brings far, far better
facilities for the programmer than does Window for the construction and
operation of an app.  The new ideas embodied in Plan-9 bring considerable
enhancements to such an environment.

If I am not going to build an app of some sort or another, what is the
value of Plan-9?  Am I just going to spend all day playing with the cool
ideas with no end or purpose in mind?

Blake



On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Bence Fábián <begnoc@gmail.com> wrote:

> If bringing Plan 9 to the masses will bring forth stuff like C++ and Java,
> I will fight against it till my dying breath.
>
> Jokes aside. People don't want to use computers. People want to use apps.
> Noone will like Plan 9. Where you have to read manuals. They hate that. If
> you like Plan 9, and there's a usecase for it, use it. And write device
> drivers. That is much more helpful than trying to convince LKML folks that
> they need userlevel namespaces. People already tried this.
>
>
> 2013/12/15 Blake McBride <blake@mcbride.name>
>
>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 5:55 AM, trebol <trebol55555@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> .....  The lack of a
>>> web browser capable of deal with today's madness and the portability
>>> limitation of ape (at least for a ignorant like me) forcesme to deal
>>> with other OS I have to install and maintaining, so the simplicity and
>>> cleanness I like so much of plan9 become useless.  Thanks to Russ Cox
>>> for P9P!
>>
>> ....
>>>
>>
>> This is a great segue into a point I was hoping to make.  I read Rob
>> Pike's comments at:
>>
>>     http://rob.pike.usesthis.com/
>>
>> and it really got me thinking.  What a great idea he talked about!  I
>> think this may be at the heart of the Plan-9 idea.
>>
>> Mind-share and markets rarely move with sense or logic.  The better
>> approach rarely wins. It is more a matter of critical mass of mind-share.
>>  Linux, for a lot of really good reasons, has that mind-share (in the
>> technical arena).  (Of course Windows has much more mind-share do largely
>> to the fact that most users are non-technical and don't understand the
>> difference - not to mention Microsoft's bullying of the market...)
>>
>> I think Plan-9 suffered from two big issues.  The first was lack of
>> mind-share (crowd acceptance).  It is very hard to compete with Windows &
>> Linux.  The second was lack of support for a huge need - a fully functional
>> browser.
>>
>> In spite of some really great ideas, I think we'd all agree that Plan-9
>> has no real future.  On the other hand, I believe that some of the best
>> ideas Plan-9 brings us can and should be a part of the future.  I think the
>> best, most practical way to bring those ideas to wide-spread use and
>> availability is to implement those ideas in the Linux kernel.  I understand
>> that, since Linux is not Plan-9, there would be compromises and
>> limitations, but it would be a huge step in the right direction.  Plan-9
>> proved those ideas in an ideal environment.  Just like what Smalltalk did
>> to the world - creating C++, Java, the mouse, etc., Plan-9 can bring its
>> ideas to the mainstream through additions and improvements to existing
>> technology like Linux.
>>
>> Just some thoughts.
>>
>> Blake McBride
>>
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5076 bytes --]