more on This guy is on to something!

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Tom Fairlie <tfairlie () attbi com>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 18:03:29 -0600
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: <[IP]> This guy is on to something!

Hi Dave,

The attached article about Linux is mildly interesting, but hardly a sign
that computer science is returning. Although the Linux movement is
interesting (and has produced cheap software) it fails the test of exciting
on several accounts.

(1) Linux is hardly anything new from a technology perspective. It's
basically Unix, which anyone can tell you is older than the majority of
slashdot readers. It's also taken Linux programmers, most working in their
spare time, quite a long time to approach the performance of Windows. For
that matter, the Unix (mach) kernel in Mac OS X was way behind Windows in
terms of multimedia performance when it was introduced--something the
average user in fact does notice and want. Apple has been hard at work to
address this.

and that leads me to (2) When a business needs to do something in a quality
way RIGHT NOW, they often turn to proprietary software to do so. Microsoft
makes a lot of money from proprietary software (crap or not) because of
this. The majority of people don't care. If Linux ever becomes super easy to
use (and plays every single game out there), then perhaps its free price tag
will work. But who's going to deliver a rich, user experience to the average
(non-savvy) computer user for free? Nobody I know.

(3) Shouldn't one aspect of "computer science" include reusable objects and
code that would make something like Linux possible in months rather than
many years? I realize that PC driver support is a nightmare, but why did so
many things (like SMP) take so many years to get right. Spare time work on
this project doesn't seem like a good enough excuse when full-time orgs like
NASA contributed so much. BTW, is Unix so perfect that we can't invent a new
OS that contains everything we can dream of that we want today?

I will use (4) to actually agree a little with the article. I would like to
see an operating system that is more transparent than Windows and the open
source Unix clones appear to be it. However, my concerns are: (a) will open
source lead to greater security or less security; (b) will business ever be
able to rely upon these clones for highly-available, mission-critical,
multi-processor systems; and (c) will they ever be able to be maintained by
the average user. I realize that Windows is far from maintainable, but a
whole generation is growing up on Windows and it's hard to throw away what
they've already learned.

Just my 2 cents.

Sincerely,

Tom Fairlie
Principal, The Axebow Group
tfairlie () axebow com


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/