From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:54:06 -0600 From: "Eric Van Hensbergen" 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: <13426df10702260708i7be0cd7bs49f7eda72c6935ea@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <13426df10702260119y1d6c77deub0e832482776bb89@mail.gmail.com> <13426df10702260708i7be0cd7bs49f7eda72c6935ea@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 14d2f39a-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 2/26/07, ron minnich wrote: > On 2/26/07, erik quanstrom wrote: > > plan 9 is having trouble keeping the converted. why would > > adding one more layer of goo to the gnu goo stack convert > > the hardened of heart? > > Because the first thing that most people say when I show them rio is > 'yuck'. And, in most cases, they don't stop saying 'yuck'.Acme does > not help. > > Sorry, but most people hate the Plan 9 GUI. It is off-putting enough > that they are not that interested in seeing the beauty of it all. > Regardless, neither rio or acme will work well on a cell phone. Probably be best off with mux. However, I think we can all agree -- while the underlying infrastructure of the Plan 9 GUI continues to be innovative and interesting, the GUI itself has never been a focus nor a strength of the system. I'm not saying we should merge Qt and Gtk or any of the Linux variants -- I continue to think we need to focus on our strengths rather than getting bogged down in eye candy. -eric