Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 19:54:36 -0700 From: mike allison <mallison@konnections.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: jack <jack@diamond.xtalwind.net>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) Message-ID: <335AD6EC.7306BE6D@konnections.com> References: <5354.861482487@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jordan's right. The two things that seem to miss in the night are
Popular user interfaces and machine access by people with glasses....
They aren't mutually exclusive, rather complementary. The point was
sacrificing one for the other at Microsoft. They took away our low
level access and tried to replace it with GUI programs which are still
too abstract to allow what you need. If the GUI is in the way, having a
program under the GUI isn't going to let you fix it.....Unless it's
built more like X or even Win3.x which is merely an app on the OS not
the whole OS...
NT needs an NTterm where you can attack the machine....
-Mike
Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> No, of course not. That would be deliberate stupidity and I'm not
> talking about anything like that.
>
> Also, the UNIX traditionalists should please bear in mind that such an
> interface would NOT BE DESIGNED FOR THEM.
>
> The tragedy of UNIX is that the propeller-heads typically design the
> interfaces according to _their_ specifications and desires, and every
> time you show them a Windows or Mac desktop they make all sorts of
> appropriate vomiting noises and claim that they'd take death by
> violent sodomy over such a system, strongly opposing any and all such
> initiatives with every atom of their bodies.
>
Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?335AD6EC.7306BE6D>