> Plan 9 has never approached Unix in popularity, and has been primarily a
> research tool:
> 
>       Plan 9 failed simply because it fell short of being a
>       compelling enough improvement on Unix to displace its ancestor.
>       Compared to Plan 9, Unix creaks and clanks and has obvious rust
>       spots, but it gets the job done well enough to hold its
>       position. There is a lesson here for ambitious system
>       architects: the most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an
>       existing codebase that is just good enough. — Eric S. Raymond[3]

the implicit definition of success here—popularity—is one i would
reject.  popularity has nothing to do with fitness for a purpose.

- erik

Reply via email to