> crap methodology versus doing something clever under the hood. You
> can't be a success unless you have an animated 3D GUI consuming most
> of your CPU resources and expending all sorts of power.


That couldn't be farther from truth, at least in my case. No one wants to
waste their computer's time :-) Yet, when it comes to choose between
wasting their time or that of their computer's then most normal people will
go for the latter.

I'm a regular Windows user. My Windows installation has been reduced to
bare minimum. It runs fine and hell it really can compete with any of the
top dogs in desktop applications. And when it comes to running a DNS
server, well, there's FreeBSD and OpenBSD.

Where is the incentive for someone other than a CS/CE OS Design/Research
student (or the like) who's a vested interest in learning "exotic OS's" to
switch to Plan 9? Plan 9 seems to be a "niche" OS, as I pointed out before.

> We should have spent the last 20 years working on movie-OS versus actually
> trying to do systems research.


Systems research? Did you actually "research" how a normal user used their
computer? Did you even try to guess how a normal user used their system?
Did you do that and end up with a technical manual whose prime example for
backup strategy involves a "Jukebox?" Systems research, as you know it,
provides a student/researcher/professor/professional with academic credit,
three meals a day, and a place to sleep--it won't Get the Users' Job Done
(tm).

Best wishes,
Eris Discordia

--On Monday, June 30, 2008 3:55 PM -0500 Eric Van Hensbergen
wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com>
> wrote:
>>>
>>> P.S. Heck, this "is" some sad commentary.

>>
>> what's sad is that unless there's a dummy's guide to
>> something, that something is not considered a success.
>>

>
> Its worse than that Skip -- I imagine many would rank Apple's time
> machine greater than venti just because it puts a pretty GUI on top of
> crap methodology versus doing something clever under the hood. You
> can't be a success unless you have an animated 3D GUI consuming most
> of your CPU resources and expending all sorts of power. We should
> have spent the last 20 years working on movie-OS versus actually
> trying to do systems research.
>
> -eric
>