Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno - Plan9

This is a discussion on Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno - Plan9 ; On 3/13/07, Harri Haataja wrote: > UI is stuck in the latter. I won't repeat the argument that frames > should be managed by a program with a policy and not by the user Couldn't you use awk for that? ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 61

Thread: Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

  1. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    On 3/13/07, Harri Haataja wrote:
    > UI is stuck in the latter. I won't repeat the argument that frames
    > should be managed by a program with a policy and not by the user


    Couldn't you use awk for that?

    -J

  2. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
    was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
    willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
    and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
    would disappear.

    I was serious about screencasts though. If there were actual,
    watchable examples of the way acme worked and tools gurus did things
    then I think people would start to "get" plan 9 more.

    Noah

    On 3/12/07, Dave Eckhardt wrote:
    > > I'm really with Minnich on this one. The GUI is what *everyone*
    > > complains about and it's always the *first* thing they complain
    > > about. I deal with pretty intelligent people in the security
    > > community and they can't handle Rio and don't want to.

    >
    > In response, a serious, non-flame, question: what's the realistic
    > alternative? It would be possible, if arduous, to replace rio with
    > a clone of, say, fvwm. But what about fluxbox and icewm and sawfish
    > and windowmaker and enlightenment? Is "the problem" really rio per
    > se, or is the problem that for each person rio isn't the thing they
    > already use?
    >
    > I guess my question translates into "Is there *one* X window manager
    > which, if cloned for Plan 9, would solve the 'rio problem'?".
    >
    > Dave Eckhardt
    >
    > P.S. And I guess the follow-on question is "Would that window manager
    > be sufficient, or are bash and turning vt into xterm necessary too?".
    >


  3. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    On 3/13/07, Noah Evans wrote:
    > I was serious about screencasts though.


    Maybe using something like this?

    http://www.unixuser.org/~euske/vnc2swf/ or
    http://www.sodan.org/~penny/vncrec/

    though other tools and drawterm might work just as well. You'd have
    to use some other tools for the voiceover.

    -Jack

  4. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    > I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
    > was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
    > willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
    > and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
    > would disappear.


    But that is all computing time that could be better spent elsewhere.
    Who actually wants their machine to run no faster than a 4.7MHz IBM
    PC-Clone, albeit a very snazzy looking one?

    ++L


  5. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    Lots of people. That's the problem.

    I'm not advocating doo-dads, I'm just saying that's fundamentally
    where I think a lot of the resistance to Plan 9 is coming from. A
    large percentage of the OS hobbyists are vain. They would rather have
    something like gnome or kde than something like rio because it looks
    "cool."

    Noah

    On 3/14/07, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    > > I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
    > > was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
    > > willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
    > > and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
    > > would disappear.

    >
    > But that is all computing time that could be better spent elsewhere.
    > Who actually wants their machine to run no faster than a 4.7MHz IBM
    > PC-Clone, albeit a very snazzy looking one?
    >
    > ++L
    >
    >


  6. RE: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    Hello

    >From tip9ug mail list:


    http://www.wakhok.ac.jp/~kida/plan9/acmewin/

    slds

    gabi


    -----Mensaje original-----
    De: 9fans-bounces+gabidiaz=gmail.com@cse.psu.edu
    [mailto:9fans-bounces+gabidiaz=gmail.com@cse.psu.edu] En nombre de Noah
    Evans
    Enviado el: miércoles, 14 de marzo de 2007 5:26
    Para: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
    Asunto: Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
    was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
    willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
    and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
    would disappear.

    I was serious about screencasts though. If there were actual,
    watchable examples of the way acme worked and tools gurus did things
    then I think people would start to "get" plan 9 more.

    Noah

    On 3/12/07, Dave Eckhardt wrote:
    > > I'm really with Minnich on this one. The GUI is what *everyone*
    > > complains about and it's always the *first* thing they complain
    > > about. I deal with pretty intelligent people in the security
    > > community and they can't handle Rio and don't want to.

    >
    > In response, a serious, non-flame, question: what's the realistic
    > alternative? It would be possible, if arduous, to replace rio with
    > a clone of, say, fvwm. But what about fluxbox and icewm and sawfish
    > and windowmaker and enlightenment? Is "the problem" really rio per
    > se, or is the problem that for each person rio isn't the thing they
    > already use?
    >
    > I guess my question translates into "Is there *one* X window manager
    > which, if cloned for Plan 9, would solve the 'rio problem'?".
    >
    > Dave Eckhardt
    >
    > P.S. And I guess the follow-on question is "Would that window manager
    > be sufficient, or are bash and turning vt into xterm necessary too?".
    >



  7. RE: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    It would be a lot easier to accept the lesser functionality required
    ... if it were ever going to be improved, but I honestly don't believe it ever will be.

    I've been using it on the desktop for nearly 10 years now, and
    while it's come a long way, it's still nowhere near where it should be
    considering the amount of time and effort that has been spent on it.
    In many cases, I'm still seeing the same arguments that I saw 2 years
    ago, and 2 years before that. Hardware support has improved, but in
    the main areas where we need free drivers, the options are still
    limited (networking and video).

    Without the cooperation of the hardware vendors, the current situation
    will never change. Without a change in the mindset surrounding
    interface design (we need psychologists for this more than we need
    programmers) it will still be just that little bit too much more
    complex for the average end user.

    i changed some of the nouns to pronouns. that was someone writing about Linux a few days ago.

  8. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    > if rio did have cute windows,
    I'll have to show you these later, my ISP's ftp has disappeared & I cant
    remember the uri for the image

    > anti-aliased fonts

    check : http://farm1.static.flickr.com/163/4...59102c_b_d.jpg
    > and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
    > would disappear.

    cant do that one

  9. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    i missed this the first time around. i put code2000 and cyberbit
    on ftp:/quanstro.net/pub/plan9/antialias.tar. it's 28MB. i didn't
    know if that's too big for sources.

    cyberbit and code2000 are anti-aliased, variable-width fonts.

    - erik

  10. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    > I'm not advocating doo-dads, I'm just saying that's fundamentally
    > where I think a lot of the resistance to Plan 9 is coming from. A
    > large percentage of the OS hobbyists are vain. They would rather have
    > something like gnome or kde than something like rio because it looks
    > "cool."
    >
    > Noah
    >
    > On 3/14/07, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    >> > I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
    >> > was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
    >> > willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
    >> > and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
    >> > would disappear.

    >>
    >> But that is all computing time that could be better spent elsewhere.
    >> Who actually wants their machine to run no faster than a 4.7MHz IBM
    >> PC-Clone, albeit a very snazzy looking one?
    >>

    > Lots of people. That's the problem.
    >

    So what? I didn't ask "how many?", I asked "who?". We do not run
    Plan 9 development as a democracy, it is a meritocracy where program
    code gets you Noddy points. So is Linux, actually, and the real and
    significant difference is that Linux was there to fill a gap before
    Plan 9, so the expectant mediocracy took it on as their own. In a lot
    of ways, I'm glad Plan 9 didn't suffer that fate and I'm even more
    glad that the mediocracy is too busy shining the chrome on Linux to
    come and interfere with the engineering in Plan 9.

    ++L


  11. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    > > Lots of people. That's the problem.
    > >

    > So what? I didn't ask "how many?", I asked "who?". We do not run


    I like pretty pictures and eye candy. That's why I bought a Mac. If
    Plan 9 is what ran on a Mac, I wouldn't have bought one.

    --dho

  12. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    > I like pretty pictures and eye candy. That's why I bought a Mac. If
    > Plan 9 is what ran on a Mac, I wouldn't have bought one.


    Nobody denies you the right to enjoy what you consider a pleasant
    computing experience. But why must Plan 9 come into it at all? You
    seem to have what you want in OS/X or whatever runs on your Mac. End
    of story.

    ++L


  13. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    2007/3/15, lucio@proxima.alt.za :
    > > I like pretty pictures and eye candy. That's why I bought a Mac. If
    > > Plan 9 is what ran on a Mac, I wouldn't have bought one.

    >
    > Nobody denies you the right to enjoy what you consider a pleasant
    > computing experience. But why must Plan 9 come into it at all? You
    > seem to have what you want in OS/X or whatever runs on your Mac. End
    > of story.


    I don't know, and I never said anybody denied me anything. You asked
    who [in the Plan 9 community] cares, I answered. I do.

    I'd probably use Plan 9 more if rio was prettier and more like what I
    use. Point blank. Yes, I'm fully aware that the sources are available
    for me to make it so. I don't have time. I do have ability.

    I gave a snide response because your rant on ``So what?'' seemed snide
    to me. And I do care. So, there you go.

    > ++L


    --dho

  14. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    > I don't know, and I never said anybody denied me anything. You asked
    > who [in the Plan 9 community] cares, I answered. I do.


    Fair enough. But the second question remains: where does Plan 9 fit
    in? Plan 9 started life with minimalist aspirations and grew up in a
    world that has embraced computing paradigms that seem in conflict with
    these aspirations. There seems to me that there are two options:

    1. Considerable resources are applied to produce or port a minimum
    set of applications (Gnome, FireFox, Evolution, OpenOffice, the Gimp,
    say) to Plan 9, thus competing on a better level with Linux and, to a
    much smaller extent, with Windows, or

    2. The available resources continue to be applied to problems closer
    to the Plan 9 concept space (Abaco, Omero, GSoC projects, etc.).

    As I see little merit in making another Windows of Plan 9, even via
    the Linux route, I prefer the second option. Also, I don't understand
    the benefits of the first option: when I want Linux, NetBSD or
    Windows, I have them all at my fingertips, at least in one version.
    None of them is an adequate replacement for any of the others, so I
    don't see how Plan 9, considerably less mainstream/orthodox than any
    of the others, could ever aspire to grab marketplace from any of its
    competitors. Certainly, I won't sell it on that ticket.

    ++L


  15. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    Hey Lucio,

    We're missing each other. The initial point of discussion was "what
    are the barriers for the adoption of plan 9?" not the development
    model or what is the "right" way to do things. My post was not meant
    to advocate making rio "prettier". I hope I made that clear.

    What I would like to reiterate, though, is that the expectations of a
    typical user, even a very smart one, differ from Plan 9 community. If
    we could better understand that difference and couch Plan 9 advocacy
    in terms a regular user can more readily understand Plan 9 advocacy
    would be much more effective.

    Noah

    On 3/15/07, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    > > I'm not advocating doo-dads, I'm just saying that's fundamentally
    > > where I think a lot of the resistance to Plan 9 is coming from. A
    > > large percentage of the OS hobbyists are vain. They would rather have
    > > something like gnome or kde than something like rio because it looks
    > > "cool."
    > >
    > > Noah
    > >
    > > On 3/14/07, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    > >> > I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
    > >> > was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
    > >> > willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
    > >> > and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
    > >> > would disappear.
    > >>
    > >> But that is all computing time that could be better spent elsewhere.
    > >> Who actually wants their machine to run no faster than a 4.7MHz IBM
    > >> PC-Clone, albeit a very snazzy looking one?
    > >>

    > > Lots of people. That's the problem.
    > >

    > So what? I didn't ask "how many?", I asked "who?". We do not run
    > Plan 9 development as a democracy, it is a meritocracy where program
    > code gets you Noddy points. So is Linux, actually, and the real and
    > significant difference is that Linux was there to fill a gap before
    > Plan 9, so the expectant mediocracy took it on as their own. In a lot
    > of ways, I'm glad Plan 9 didn't suffer that fate and I'm even more
    > glad that the mediocracy is too busy shining the chrome on Linux to
    > come and interfere with the engineering in Plan 9.
    >
    > ++L
    >
    >


  16. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    > We're missing each other. The initial point of discussion was "what
    > are the barriers for the adoption of plan 9?" not the development
    > model or what is the "right" way to do things. My post was not meant
    > to advocate making rio "prettier". I hope I made that clear.
    >

    I'm sure you're right, and I ought to have pointed out at the outset
    that the adoption of Plan 9 by lots of users is not the good thing
    that it seems to be. In fact, in my opinion, it is not even likely as
    it would be, as discussed here, by imitation, which is hardly the role
    Plan 9 should be playing.

    > What I would like to reiterate, though, is that the expectations of a
    > typical user, even a very smart one, differ from Plan 9 community. If
    > we could better understand that difference and couch Plan 9 advocacy
    > in terms a regular user can more readily understand Plan 9 advocacy
    > would be much more effective.


    But we'd waste enormous resources in exactly the wrong direction.
    Plan 9 has an appeal of itself. It is hardly sensible to try to cast
    Bette Midler in Claudia Schiffer's role. Teaching Claudia Schiffer to
    act (or sing) like Bette Midler may be more successful, but the result
    isn't a certainty.

    I'm sorry we (I, in particular) lost the thread of this conversation,
    as you point out. I think it should be made clear as soon as the
    subject is raised that Plan 9 is not anywhere near ready for broad
    acceptance, largely because it would entail straying very far from its
    fundamentals, but also because the active community, meaning the
    contributors, are much more likely to focus on Plan 9's unique
    properties than on imitating Windows.

    Perhaps we could (re)assemble an FAQ in which this feature of Plan 9
    would be made much clearer, with corroborating evidence from the realm
    of those assets that the mainstream OSes are still struggling to
    acquire.

    ++L

    PS: I think Plan 9's biggest "mistake" was to drop Alef where it
    should have become the _only_ development language. I know this is
    absolute pie-in-the-sky and I accept without qualification the
    motivation for dropping Alef. But a lot of discussion would have been
    avoided if there wasn't so much C code out there waiting to be
    adopted, poorly, into the Plan 9 fold. Andrey's "libssh" is very much
    a case in point, but anything APE could be used as an example. I do
    not intend any disrespect by this, I'm merely pointing out that C
    raises expectations of Plan 9 that are not realistic. Plan
    9-with-Alef became Inferno and no-one is suggesting that _it_ should
    be more widely adopted by adding Linux or Windows features to it.

    In summary, I think the subject needs resolving. The derided "road
    map" for Plan 9 should be a topic for study and contribution, as much
    as are P9P and APE ports, although it is understandable that we all
    only have the resources (or motivation) to contribute when we're stung
    personally :-)


  17. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    >
    > PS: I think Plan 9's biggest "mistake" was to drop Alef where it
    > should have become the _only_ development language. I know this is
    > absolute pie-in-the-sky and I accept without qualification the
    > motivation for dropping Alef. But a lot of discussion would have been
    > avoided if there wasn't so much C code out there waiting to be


    So like Cortez, you burn your ships behind you. That would remove the
    temptation to move ill-considered software over. Isn't the fact that 8c
    isn't bug-compatible with gcc obstacle enough?

    However, it isn't like there's pressure to maintain legacy applications...

    -GBA


  18. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 09:28:00PM +0200, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    > As I see little merit in making another Windows of Plan 9, even via
    > the Linux route, I prefer the second option. Also, I don't understand
    > the benefits of the first option: when I want Linux, NetBSD or
    > Windows, I have them all at my fingertips, at least in one version.


    IF you wanted to look at the popularity aspect, bit by bit a Windows
    was made of Linux in order to get a wider audience. In replacing NT
    servers in small shops sneakily and making firewalls, print servers,
    web servers etc, it worked fine. In the current desktop horrors,
    maybe not. A lot of doors were opened to all kinds of systems.

    Doing similiar with plan9 might mean that there could be small plan9
    servers doing those back of the closet jobs. I really like that goal.

    Another thing might be trying to get everywhere, including glossy
    desktops. Looking at Linux today, that might be a very risky route.

    Then there's the compatibility. You might have to stick with some
    system or such just because of one app (Excel, Photoshop, Firefox...)
    and that's a miserable state IMO/E. Maybe Xen will make that a lot
    easier than before.


  19. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    Stop this thread. Please.

    Eternally grateful

    uriel

    P.S.: If you need to have this discussion, please read the 9fans
    archives from the past ten years, you will not notice the difference.


    On 3/16/07, Harri Haataja wrote:
    > On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 09:28:00PM +0200, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    > > As I see little merit in making another Windows of Plan 9, even via
    > > the Linux route, I prefer the second option. Also, I don't understand
    > > the benefits of the first option: when I want Linux, NetBSD or
    > > Windows, I have them all at my fingertips, at least in one version.

    >
    > IF you wanted to look at the popularity aspect, bit by bit a Windows
    > was made of Linux in order to get a wider audience. In replacing NT
    > servers in small shops sneakily and making firewalls, print servers,
    > web servers etc, it worked fine. In the current desktop horrors,
    > maybe not. A lot of doors were opened to all kinds of systems.
    >
    > Doing similiar with plan9 might mean that there could be small plan9
    > servers doing those back of the closet jobs. I really like that goal.
    >
    > Another thing might be trying to get everywhere, including glossy
    > desktops. Looking at Linux today, that might be a very risky route.
    >
    > Then there's the compatibility. You might have to stick with some
    > system or such just because of one app (Excel, Photoshop, Firefox...)
    > and that's a miserable state IMO/E. Maybe Xen will make that a lot
    > easier than before.
    >
    >


  20. Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno

    On 3/15/07, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
    >
    > I'm sorry we (I, in particular) lost the thread of this conversation,
    > as you point out. I think it should be made clear as soon as the
    > subject is raised that Plan 9 is not anywhere near ready for broad
    > acceptance, largely because it would entail straying very far from its
    > fundamentals, but also because the active community, meaning the
    > contributors, are much more likely to focus on Plan 9's unique
    > properties than on imitating Windows.
    >


    That sort of ignores the whole Java on Inferno fiasco. Unfortunately,
    people seem to want incremental change -- they want their old
    environments with perhaps a smattering of something new. I suppose in
    that way Inferno does really well since it runs in (and beside) old
    environments. Unfortunately, many of Plan9/Inferno's advantages can
    only be realized in a much more systematic way (plumber is far less
    useful with only a single app using it).

    However, I don't think that detracts from your overall point -- as
    I've said previously I think we are far better off focusing on
    developing Plan 9/Inferno's strengths rather than trying to make it
    look like something which already exists elsewhere.

    -eric

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast