Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 23:17:37 +0200 From: Peter Korsten <peter@grendel.IAEhv.nl> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATT Unix for Windows ! Message-ID: <19970827231737.28842@grendel.IAEhv.nl> In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19970827104431.0097ce70@cybercom.net>; from The Classiest Man Alive on Wed, Aug 27, 1997 at 10:44:31AM -0400 References: <3.0.3.32.19970827104431.0097ce70@cybercom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The Classiest Man Alive shared with us:
> At 11:55 PM 8/26/97 +0200, you wrote:
> > [VC++, GUI's, etc.]
> >
> >So the developers may like a text interface, many people don't.
> >And apart from all the marketing hype MS is creating, that's
> >something to be considered - though very hard to solve.
>
> What I've noticed is that the GUI environments tend to have easier learning
> curves, but that in the long run, command lines with terse commands and
> options tend to be more efficient for the experienced user. A good, simple
> example of this is trying to copy groups of files with a graphical file
> manager or a prompt. Finding out the options to recurse subdirectories and
> observe time modification stamps would probably take longer than dragging
> and dropping, but once you had the knowledge in your head, typing the
> command probably takes less time than all the clicking and dragging
> involved in the GUI approach. The mistake is in thinking that the two are
> mutually exclusive.
This is what made the Amiga such an excellent machine. The GUI wasn't
as slick as Windows 95/NT 4.0 (though third party extensies existed)
and the shell wasn't as powerful as a Unix shell (though third party
extensions existed), both were very useable and offered many interesting
features. The copy described above could be done with
list >s:temp dir1: since 1-may-1997 upto 30-may-1997 all lformat="copy %s%s dir2:"
execute s:temp
delete s:temp
With version 2 of the OS, you also had ARexx (the Amiga version of Rexx)
as an interface. You could use it for inter-program communication and
create custom scripts to control one application from the other.
(And I haven't even mentioned the possibility to assign a logical
name to a disk, directory or device. Or the excellent libraries
and devices system. What a waste. And still, the Amiga is The
Computer That Would Not Die. It's been bought by Gateway 2000.
Commodore went bankrupt, it's assets and it's name was bought by
Escom. Escom went bankrupt, the assets (being the Amiga) stayed
in their own (bankrupt) company. The name Commodore was sold to
the Dutch section of Escom, who called themselves Commodore since
then. It went bankrupt this week. The Dutch firm Dynabyte showed
an interest in the name, so I expect them to be out of business in
a year, give or take a bit. But the Amiga still lives and has an
active group of users. Amazing.)
With Unix, you have a terrific shell and hardly anything more (some
support for printers, like other OS's have, would be nice). With
Windows, you have a very consistent and orthogonal user interface,
but a shell that basically sucks.
> Of course, this tends to create an attitude among very skilled programmers
> that you can't accomplish to much with a mouse; command lines are the only
> way to do *real* work. ("Why, back in my day, we didn't have no
> mamby-pamby pointers and icons. Just ones and zeroes...") Unfortunately,
> those most in need of a GUI interface (like me) don't have the skill to
> create one, and those who do believe that anybody serious about their craft
> doesn't need one.
I couldn't agree more. I might be able to create a GUI, but I don't
have the time for it. Plus, there are alternatives. It's just a
matter of time until I can do the things I want with NT.
> On a slightly related note, there also seems to be a lot of Microsoft
> player hating among UNIX-heads. Granted, there's not a lot of cutting edge
> technology coming out of Redmond, but MS has mastered a technique that most
> highly skilled programmers and shops are too proud to use--taking someone
> else's good idea, combining it with their great marketing, and taking
> ownership of the market. Rather than hating MS for bastardizing the
> technology, I say that we take whatever good concepts from them that we can
> and integrate it into out products. Use their own strategy against them.
> Of course, a few mil in the bank wouldn't hurt, but we'll just do what we
> can. :-)
Yep, the hating is there. People writing 'M$' and so on... Some
months ago, I had the same approach toward Microsoft and NT. Until
a project came along, where there was a choice between Unix and NT.
It was not my decision, but I pushed it a bit towards NT - just to
figure out this OS that I knew really knew little about.
What I found out, that it does have it's quirks. Perhaps that because
I was used to FreeBSD and X. What I did like was the stability, the
excellent on-line documentation and the fact that you immediatly know
how an application works and where you can find things.
So the user interface is taken from the Mac and the NeXT. So drag-
and-drop existed for the Mac, Amiga and Archimedes. So probably
all of it existed in a earlier stage. That doesn't make the product
bad.
They do have the market, and whether you like it or not, you can't
get around it. So an occasional peek over the fence wouldn't hurt,
because we may have a proven system and freely available sources,
Joe Customer doesn't care a rat's ass. He only wants to connect
his Access database and Internet Information Server with freely
available and easy to use dbWeb.
- Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970827231737.28842>