Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!qns3.qns.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!van-bc!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!not-for-mail From: les@MCS.COM (Leslie Mikesell) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX) Date: 27 Apr 1996 15:02:08 -0500 Organization: /usr/lib/news/organi[sz]ation Lines: 78 Message-ID: <4ltug0$6he@Mercury.mcs.com> References: <NELSON.96Apr15010553@ns.crynwr.com> <31784FD9.28AA98F6@lambert.org> <kevinbDqC0xC.99w@netcom.com> <4lkcv6$n4j@gorgias.uchicago.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: mercury.mcs.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:22534 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:874 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3568 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3426 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:18323 comp.os.linux.advocacy:47378 In article <4lkcv6$n4j@gorgias.uchicago.edu>, steve farrell <spfarrel@gorgias.uchicago.edu> wrote: > >i don't really agree with the idea of unix taking over the desktop. >here's my feeling: most people really are NOT computer-lovers. in fact, >computers really do suck in so many ways, and are such a pain in the >ass for what 90% of what people use them for. these people should >not be using computers - they never should have. the desktop computer >must have had a reason for coming into being, but it obviously is not >the best solution. most people don't want to know about plug and play >or about when copland comes out. they want communicators and word >processors and game machines and things like this. just a simple tool >that does whatever. NOT a "Computer". I take it you are looking for an argument here since you are obviously using a computer to do something that you are saying people shouldn't do. The question to be answered above is why you think 'computers' don't run 'applications'? You are right that it is applications that people want but you seem to have missed the point that a properly loaded and networked desktop computer is the ideal platform for running applications. >then there are other people who actually *like* computers and even work >with them for their living and then in their free time. these people >should use computers, and many of them (like myself) love to use computers >running unix. Yes, there are people who design and build microwave ovens too. Does that mean you should know how to design or build one to use it? >i'm not sure if java and the web are right technological solution, but the >concept i think is: have an interface that is simple to use and based on a >metaphor like netscape navigator. people -- either at home, in schools, >or at the office -- have something like these java-terminals which run >netscape 5.0 or whatever that IS their "desktop". productivity apps are >written in java and provided on a use-by-use basis or whatever by their >ISP or whatever it is called in the future (probably off some FreeBSD or >Linux box =). these client machines don't need to be setup any more than >a TV set, don't run an OS that does much more than allow the JVM to run & >the io for the cable-modem. and that's about it. Of course they need to be set up in the sense that their programming must be loaded from somewhere. The user doesn't need to do this, but someone does even it it is standardized and loaded in ROM or from the network. Nothing new about that. >90% of the people who use computers would then use these simple terminals, >and the other 10% of us who actually like computers and like understanding >how they work, etc, will run free Unix. perfect world. In a perfectly networked world, the operating systems will all interoperate transparently so it will be irrelevant which parts run which OS. >i think it's crazy to expect unix to take over the desktop. why in >god's name should professors of english, secretaries, doctors, CEO's, >etc etc learn unix? if they like computers this much, they'd be CS ppl >or programmers or whatever. i don't want to be in a world with that >many computer geeks, as much as i love them and i am one myself. and >who thinks this would happen, either? People who can afford to have someone else set up their machines and networks don't ever need to interact with an operating system directly so it is quite irrelevant what is running there. The issue is the availability and pricing of applications. The bulk of reasonably priced, full featured desktop apps that are currently available have been written for MS-Windows. If that changes, so will the numbers using some other OS. >and as far as microsoft has the desktop -- who cares, the "desktop >computer" was a stupid idea in the first place. Not for the people selling them and the software. Nor for the people who use them. Les Mikesell les@mcs.com