From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) In-Reply-To: <1c5841d56430d1482b42e7f2ff366dc9@chula.quanstro.net> References: <1c5841d56430d1482b42e7f2ff366dc9@chula.quanstro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Ethan Grammatikidis Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:56:22 +0000 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] Cute plan9/inferno client? Topicbox-Message-UUID: a6b49148-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 28 Jan 2011, at 1:36 pm, erik quanstrom wrote: > > if you want to be a cynic, a non-pluggable architecture is super > for hardware companies. they can segment the heck out of > the market and get to the bad old says of charging big bucks > for little extra features. since there's no way to add them > yourselves. there goes my worldview. ;) i had been thinking integrated solutions were the way to go because they can be so much simpler but i had forgotten about this possibility. thanks for the reminder. come to think of it, it's not just a matter of the hardware companies being able to charge big bucks for extra features. it can also take a lot of work to add a little extra to a non-pluggable design.