On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Corey <co...@bitworthy.net> wrote: > On Monday 29 March 2010 17:24:08 erik quanstrom wrote: >> > In any given social environment, communicating dissatisfaction of >> > the status quo is often the logical first step towards choices (a) >> > and/or (b) - due to the fact that going off on one's own to work >> > alone in a vacuum on a major undertaking is generally recognized >> > as an inherently ill-fated strategy. >> >> except that these same arguments have been going on for as long >> as i have read this list and no one has done anything about it. >> after 15+ years, i think it's fair to ask "where's the beef?" >> > > "Where's the beef?" is certainly a fair and reasonable thing to ask. > > What I'm wondering, however, is "_what's_ the beef?" > > As you said, these arguments have indeed been going on for some > time - so, why only talk and no action? It's weird. > > I can't help but wonder: where's the crux of the inertia? > > Are the core Plan 9 design concepts in fact ineffective or unsuitable for > building a general purpose computing environment? > > I find that very hard to believe - but there's over 15 years of evidence > which seems to imply just that. > > No one's willing to spearhead a "General Purpose 9" experiment, and no > one's interested in collaborating on and contributing to such a project?
would you invite us for that experiment or keep talking, talking, talking... and talking? > "If you want [general purpose], you know where to get it." seems to > be the period that ends all such discussion. > a bunch of special purpose crap put together does not make a general purpose one. iru
