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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 09:28:00PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.
