> On 5/17/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Well, Ron, as explained elsewhere, our display gets hard to read pretty >> easily. >> Even 80x24 may be too small for continued use; it's something that will need >> to >> be tested. > > I'm with Charles on this one. I do a lot of work with Plan 9 systems > that don't use rio or any wm for that matter. On those systems, the > network is everything. Maybe you're not going to run connected. > > But, in our case, we had systems w/o a graphical display, that I > needed to run connected, and I would have been very unhappy doing > those systems with anything but Plan 9. > > I see your point re the display, but based on our experience, I still > think Linux is going to limit you in the end. > > That said, there's lots more tty eye candy for Linux these days ... > some things are truly easier with Linux. Just none of the network > things. > > thanks > > ron
Plan 9 fails for GUI-less use. If we go to a GUI system at some point, I think it may be back in the running, but consider the current requirements. We need something: -That has a good CLI -That can handle wireless -That has a lot of CLI-oriented applications Linux has support for a *lot* of wireless cards. It's based on a system that was designed for CLI use. It's got emacs, so I guess that answers all questions about CLI-oriented applications. Plan 9... working at the plain old command line, can you even interrupt a program? The two main editors are GUI based (not gonna use 'ed'). As seems apparent, it has far fewer supported wireless cards. It runs on fewer machines. Somebody, quick, send me a decent head mounted display, a Twiddler, and a little machine that can run Plan 9 with supported wireless. I'll set it all up, use it to access csplan9. Then I'll post pictures on the wiki. Until then, I guess I'm still gonna end with Linux. John
