>Plan9-with-Alef became Inferno and no-one is suggesting that _it_ should
>be more widely adopted by adding Linux or Windows features to it.
you'd be surprised ... (or perhaps not).
anyway, i think uriel is right and this endlessly revisited discussion
isn't profitable, and could be dealt with in
On 3/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm sorry we (I, in particular) lost the thread of this conversation,
as you point out. I think it should be made clear as soon as the
subject is raised that Plan 9 is not anywhere near ready for broad
acceptance, largely because it would
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 PROT
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 a
>
> PS: I think Plan 9's biggest "mistake" was to drop Alef where it
> should have become the _only_ development language. I know this is
> absolute pie-in-the-sky and I accept without qualification the
> motivation for dropping Alef. But a lot of discussion would have been
> avoided if there was
> We're missing each other. The initial point of discussion was "what
> are the barriers for the adoption of plan 9?" not the development
> model or what is the "right" way to do things. My post was not meant
> to advocate making rio "prettier". I hope I made that clear.
>
I'm sure you're right, a
Hey Lucio,
We're missing each other. The initial point of discussion was "what
are the barriers for the adoption of plan 9?" not the development
model or what is the "right" way to do things. My post was not meant
to advocate making rio "prettier". I hope I made that clear.
What I would like to
> I don't know, and I never said anybody denied me anything. You asked
> who [in the Plan 9 community] cares, I answered. I do.
Fair enough. But the second question remains: where does Plan 9 fit
in? Plan 9 started life with minimalist aspirations and grew up in a
world that has embraced computi
2007/3/15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I like pretty pictures and eye candy. That's why I bought a Mac. If
> Plan 9 is what ran on a Mac, I wouldn't have bought one.
Nobody denies you the right to enjoy what you consider a pleasant
computing experience. But why must Plan 9 come int
> I like pretty pictures and eye candy. That's why I bought a Mac. If
> Plan 9 is what ran on a Mac, I wouldn't have bought one.
Nobody denies you the right to enjoy what you consider a pleasant
computing experience. But why must Plan 9 come into it at all? You
seem to have what you want in OS/X
> Lots of people. That's the problem.
>
So what? I didn't ask "how many?", I asked "who?". We do not run
I like pretty pictures and eye candy. That's why I bought a Mac. If
Plan 9 is what ran on a Mac, I wouldn't have bought one.
--dho
> I'm not advocating doo-dads, I'm just saying that's fundamentally
> where I think a lot of the resistance to Plan 9 is coming from. A
> large percentage of the OS hobbyists are vain. They would rather have
> something like gnome or kde than something like rio because it looks
> "cool."
>
> Noah
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 06:43:47 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ron minnich) wrote:
> On 3/6/07, Vester Thacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Well, I apologize for offending you. But what ideas are you
> > suggesting that we migrate toward?
>
> no, sorry, I was kind of short. No problem :-)
>
> I actuall
>From: YAMANASHI Takeshi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>On Wed Mar 7 15:43:27 JST 2007, ron minnich wrote:
>> Everybody wants everything
>> to look like a linux desktop, even a cluster node. It's kind of sad.
>> Clusters are stuck in a 1997 mentality.
>And they still use Fortran for their job.
12
i missed this the first time around. i put code2000 and cyberbit
on ftp:/quanstro.net/pub/plan9/antialias.tar. it's 28MB. i didn't
know if that's too big for sources.
cyberbit and code2000 are anti-aliased, variable-width fonts.
- erik
> if rio did have cute windows,
I'll have to show you these later, my ISP's ftp has disappeared & I cant
remember the uri for the image
> anti-aliased fonts
check : http://farm1.static.flickr.com/163/420928486_15d959102c_b_d.jpg
and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about
It would be a lot easier to accept the lesser functionality required
... if it were ever going to be improved, but I honestly don't believe
it ever will be.
I've been using it on the desktop for nearly 10 years now, and
while it's come a long way, it's still nowher
Hi,
> >From tip9ug mail list:
>
> http://www.wakhok.ac.jp/~kida/plan9/acmewin/
Or go directly here to see a watchable example of editting with acme.
http://www.wakhok.ac.jp/~kida/plan9/acmewin/acme01.htm
--
Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno
I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
and li
Sorry for stirring up the settled dust...
On Wed Mar 7 15:43:27 JST 2007, ron minnich wrote:
> Everybody wants everything
> to look like a linux desktop, even a cluster node. It's kind of sad.
> Clusters are stuck in a 1997 mentality.
And they still use Fortran for their job.
I sure agree that n
Lots of people. That's the problem.
I'm not advocating doo-dads, I'm just saying that's fundamentally
where I think a lot of the resistance to Plan 9 is coming from. A
large percentage of the OS hobbyists are vain. They would rather have
something like gnome or kde than something like rio because
> I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
> was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
> willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
> and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
> would disapp
On 3/13/07, Noah Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was serious about screencasts though.
Maybe using something like this?
http://www.unixuser.org/~euske/vnc2swf/ or
http://www.sodan.org/~penny/vncrec/
though other tools and drawterm might work just as well. You'd have
to use some other too
I think the root of the bias against rio is that it isn't "pretty". I
was joking when I talked about gradients and rounded corners, but I'm
willing to bet that if rio did have cute windows, anti-aliased fonts
and little whirry 3d doo dads that a lot of the complaints about it
would disappear.
I w
On 3/13/07, Harri Haataja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
UI is stuck in the latter. I won't repeat the argument that frames
should be managed by a program with a policy and not by the user
Couldn't you use awk for that? ;)
-J
On Tue Mar 13 08:55:29 EST 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> OTOH I think that the reason more gui's and wm's keep popping up
> is that they're all broken. People switch when something that
> seems to be a better iteration comes along or when they have no
> choice or energy to make it.
like miniski
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 04:45:44AM -0400, Dave Eckhardt wrote:
> In response, a serious, non-flame, question: what's the realistic
> alternative? It would be possible, if arduous, to replace rio with
> a clone of, say, fvwm. But what about fluxbox and icewm and sawfish
> and windowmaker and enli
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 06:46:01AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> (after all, it's
> the F40 that has a piece of steel cord in a nylon pipe to open the
> door from the inside, isn't it?)
If you look at it, I guess you could call the whole F40 a piece of
steel cord in a nylon pipe :)
> PS: The
On 3/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 08:55:42AM -0800, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
> > -the fact I find the documentation unreadable in a term so I have to
> > read the docs in a browser on my other comp,
>
> man -P man
>
> > -obviously the fact that it's q
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 08:55:42AM -0800, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
> > -the fact I find the documentation unreadable in a term so I have to
> > read the docs in a browser on my other comp,
>
> man -P man
>
> > -obviously the fact that it's quite a different system from unix,
> > -the lack of comp
> -the fact I find the documentation unreadable in a term so I have to
> read the docs in a browser on my other comp,
man -P man
> -obviously the fact that it's quite a different system from unix,
> -the lack of completion with tab (I know it can be done with another
> key, but it's hard to brea
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 02:28:08PM -0800, John Floren wrote:
> On 3/6/07, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Now, I run rio, on linux and plan 9, and I like it. But, that said, if
> >Plan 9 has an achilles heel, rio is it. It's the first (and last)
> >thing many people see on Plan 9.
>
>
Honestly, I happen to boot plan9 from times to times, when I find enough
time to play with it and try to get to know it, and so far rio has not
been the major problem for me. After all, once a term is opened, I
don't really have much more to ask from the window managing system when
it comes to get
> I'm really with Minnich on this one. The GUI is what *everyone*
> complains about and it's always the *first* thing they complain
> about. I deal with pretty intelligent people in the security
> community and they can't handle Rio and don't want to.
In response, a serious, non-flame, question:
> By 1993 Sun and other companies had made it impossible to get OS
> source. The vendors, who owned the clustering space at the time, cut
> their own throats by refusing to release source. People voted with
> their feet. Sound familiar? :-)
Yes, but the tune I hear in South Africa's business commu
> From: Lucio De Re <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Quake is to Linux what 1-2-3 was to the IBM Personal Computer.
> Without it, I believe, Linux would still be as much of a curiosity as
> Plan 9 is today.
Did I really say that? :-)
++L
On 3/8/07, matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://9fans.net/archive/2001/06/170
From: Lucio De Re <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Quake is to Linux what 1-2-3 was to the IBM Personal Computer.
Without it, I believe, Linux would still be as much of a curiosity as
Plan 9 is today.
interesting perspective.
http://9fans.net/archive/2001/06/170
From: Lucio De Re <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Quake is to Linux what 1-2-3 was to the IBM Personal Computer.
Without it, I believe, Linux would still be as much of a curiosity as
Plan 9 is today.
http://9fans.net/archive/1995/08/20
:)
On 8 Mar 2007, at 21:02, Geoffrey Avila wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, don bailey wrote:
I'm really with Minnich on this one. The GUI is what *everyone*
complains about and it's always the *first* thing they complain
about. I deal with pretty intelligent pe
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, don bailey wrote:
I'm really with Minnich on this one. The GUI is what *everyone*
complains about and it's always the *first* thing they complain
about. I deal with pretty intelligent people in the security
community and they can't handle Rio and don't want to.
Yeah. I've
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The less cynical part of me says that windows got so huge through the
usual process by which software gets huge: hiring.
It's really easy to believe you need more manpower on your software
project. That eventually leads to dividing your now-unman
David Leimbach wrote:
So how did Windows get so huge? :-)
By
skillfully managing perceptions
building a worldwide network of "certified" people whose
livelihoods depend upon increasing complexity
ensuring the support of the hardware community by requiring
regular purchases of new comput
On 3/8/07, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
that's a unixism. plan 9 uses "lookman".
- erik
He was referring to a unix "war story" so it was apropos to use apropos.
On Thu Mar 8 10:07:36 EST 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 3/8/07, matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > "
Perhaps one should rephrase it as `you are most comfortable with what you've
already learned.' The main obstacle seems to be to acknowledge that your
current environment might not be the universally best. But it seems that
trend isn't really new, just increasing.
It amazes me to no end that those
in early unix days, someone added a short shell script `pip' to the unix system
i used. the script amounted to
echo pipes exist!
i suppose it was intended to educate the former rsx-11 users.--- Begin Message ---
that's a unixism. plan 9 uses "lookman".
- erik
On Thu Mar 8 10:07:36 EST
that's a unixism. plan 9 uses "lookman".
- erik
On Thu Mar 8 10:07:36 EST 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 3/8/07, matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > "How do I find out what commands I can use?"
> > ls /bin
> >
> >
> >
> think about what you want to do and use apropos.
On 3/8/07, matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "How do I find out what commands I can use?"
ls /bin
think about what you want to do and use apropos.
On 3/7/07, Lyndon Nerenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 7, 2007, at 5:16 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> You're most comfortable with what you learn learn.
You're most comfortable with what you learn first :-P
If that were true, I'd still be able to remember how to use "Attrib" on DOS.
speak for yourself.
- erik
100 mail thread!!!. The real problems is that 9fans spend more time writing
e-mails that code!!!.
G.
--
- curiosity sKilled the cat
> Put me in front of VMS and I start to hurl. To me, the interface is
> rebarbative.
>
> Put a VMS user in front of a UNIX terminal and they will hurl. To
> them, anything that lacks logicals is untenable.
>
> How many of you enjoy the music your kids listen to? Your parents
>
"How do I find out what commands I can use?"
ls /bin
On Mar 7, 2007, at 5:16 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
You're most comfortable with what you learn learn.
You're most comfortable with what you learn first :-P
On 3/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How can you get under the hood if you can't figure out how to pop it up?
Umm, read the documentation?
8½ was brilliant for that. unless you read at least the introduction
to the system, you were getting *nowhere*. fast. i learned that my
first day with my
On 3/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How can you get under the hood if you can't figure out how to pop it up?
Umm, read the documentation?
Hahaha, I remember having this problem when I was first introduced to
Plan 9, trying to figure out how to read the wiki in acme withou
* John Osborne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> fwiw, stddef.h is part of the linux kernel headers... blame linus and
> not the gcc guys.
My bad. I assumed it belonged to gcc as it resides in
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/include/stddef.h, yuck. But it does
explain the catering for gcc 2.0.so
> How can you get under the hood if you can't figure out how to pop it up?
Umm, read the documentation?
On Mar 7, 2007, at 10:41 AM, Robert Sherwood wrote:
The interfaces are baffling. As Master Shake said, "It's too
advanced to be compatible". Not just rio; I mean adding a user to a
system, logging in under a different account by rebooting, mounting
devices as filesystems, making configurat
I'm really with Minnich on this one. The GUI is what *everyone*
complains about and it's always the *first* thing they complain
about. I deal with pretty intelligent people in the security
community and they can't handle Rio and don't want to.
It isn't out of ignorance or the residue of sub-intel
On 3/7/07, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
beer didn't exist until the invention of the tin can.
the world was in black-and-white until 1965.
computers didn't exist until the mid 90s when
berners-lee invented them.
On NeXT systems to boot. So how did Windows get so huge? :-)
- eri
On 15:21 Wed 07 Mar , John Osborne wrote:
> fwiw, stddef.h is part of the linux kernel headers... blame linus and
> not the gcc guys.
linux is as idiotic as gcc.
On 3/7/07, Martin Neubauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[cut]
I actually had problems compiling old drawterm code on my gentoo amd64
box. The error looked similar, yet I found the offending part to be
some kind of type mismatch which got loose because on amd64 and x86
the types involved were little
fwiw, stddef.h is part of the linux kernel headers... blame linus and
not the gcc guys.
On 3/7/07, Martin Neubauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* ron minnich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The isses of Python and gcc are not simply academic. They're part of
> the DOE meal ticket.
I happen to have l
* ron minnich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The isses of Python and gcc are not simply academic. They're part of
> the DOE meal ticket.
I happen to have lost what respect was left for gcc a couple of weeks ago
when I tried to compile drawterm on a 64bit linux box. Gcc barfed on a
malformed typedef
2. The interfaces are baffling. As Master Shake said, "It's too
advanced to be compatible". Not just rio; I mean adding a user to a system,
logging in under a different account by rebooting, mounting devices as
filesystems, making configuration changes, everything is different. I don't
think
>infrastructure that shows the benefits of the plan 9 approach. And when you
>finally do, It's not clear that you've got something better, because there's
>nothing you can do after building it that you couldn't do before. Of course,
you can build resource sharing systems without spending years and
> (for example, sensor networks and motes
> and what not would probably fit into the server appliance class, but a
> proper phone would be more like a terminal)
But in Plan 9 even a proper phone would be a server appliance, just
like the workstation. That bit of the Plan 9 paradigm should be
cont
> When did electricity exist, versus when did electricity exist in the home?
And we do not get a great deal of choice between AC and DC even though
there are places where the one is superior to the other.
It seems to me that many here want to have their cake and eat it: they
want those features o
>>> What is the next road map step for plan9?
>>
>> ROAD map? `per ardua ad astra'!
>>
> "Where we're going, we don't need roads!"
Actually, it's more that the roads just don't look like conventional
roads. But they are there, make no mistake, and they are better than
the convention for those tha
On Wed Mar 7 13:18:26 EST 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > (e) 9p appliances. the cannonical example of this would be ken's
> > fileserver. it doesn't run the same kernel as the cpu server. but it
> > does speak 9p. thus it is able to be a very high-reliablity, well-
> > featured, efficient
Hi, sympathetic outsider reporting here:
For me personally, as a member of the volunteer focus group, the reasons
that plan 9 is such a pain are the same reasons I'm drawn to it:
1. Plan 9 is a network OS. The downside is that a single, disconnected
plan 9 workstation is a pain in the ass t
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, C H Forsyth wrote:
What is the next road map step for plan9?
ROAD map? `per ardua ad astra'!
"Where we're going, we don't need roads!"
On 3/7/07, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
thanks for the well considered post.
i would add (somewhat less articulately)
(e) 9p appliances
That's certainly fair. I was thinking as well that there probably
should be some extra category for "embedded" to cover scenarios like
the
> (e) 9p appliances. the cannonical example of this would be ken's
> fileserver. it doesn't run the same kernel as the cpu server. but it
> does speak 9p. thus it is able to be a very high-reliablity, well-
> featured, efficient plan 9 appliance without a large or complex codebase.
> (even the
Anyone in a computer science program currently? Did VMS exist?
for many CS programs' intents and purposes UNIX doesn't exist anymore either.
On 3/7/07, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
computers didn't exist until the mid 90s when
berners-lee invented them.
When did electricity exist, versus when did electricity exist in the home?
For most people in the previous generation, your last statement might
as well be true. No on
beer didn't exist until the invention of the tin can.
the world was in black-and-white until 1965.
computers didn't exist until the mid 90s when
berners-lee invented them.
- erik
On Wed Mar 7 11:56:32 EST 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Right. Maybe a major issue why I personally cannot rea
On 3/6/07, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I actually agree with your points in many ways. I just don't know how
to get around the problem of showing this system to people.
I have to admit, I'm a waffler (yum, waffles, but way off topic). I
have no Plan 9 system running currently, but I
Right. Maybe a major issue why I personally cannot really get much further
with Plan 9 (with all due respect to those people who did *something* about
it already) is the lack of a modern, fully capable web browser.
How *did* we get anything done in the 1970s ...
thanks for the well considered post.
i would add (somewhat less articulately)
(e) 9p appliances. the cannonical example of this would be ken's
fileserver. it doesn't run the same kernel as the cpu server. but it
does speak 9p. thus it is able to be a very high-reliablity, well-
featured, effi
On 3/7/07, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/6/07, Vester Thacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I apologize for offending you. But what ideas are you suggesting
> that we migrate toward?
There are all sorts of different Plan 9's --
a) There is Plan 9 the research operating sys
>What is the next road map step for plan9?
ROAD map? `per ardua ad astra'!
What is the next road map step for plan9?
--- C H Forsyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Java/J++/javascript/VisualBasic/FlashPlayer/blahblahblah/AndIDontKnowWhichElse
> crap... is it really worth it???
>
> there are interesting things to play with in there,
> but for a browser, just vncv to som
>Java/J++/javascript/VisualBasic/FlashPlayer/blahblahblah/AndIDontKnowWhichElse
>crap... is it really worth it???
there are interesting things to play with in there, but for a browser, just
vncv to something
where it still won't work but at least you'll have someone else to blame.
for someone's
>> Anyway, I hope that we can move past Rio being the bane of Plan 9. I'm
>> quite sure Rio alone is not what limits Plan 9's popularity and usage
>> today.
>Right. Maybe a major issue why I personally cannot really get much further
>with Plan 9 (with all due respect to those people who did *
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 06:52:13 +0100, Vester Thacker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyway, I hope that we can move past Rio being the bane of Plan 9. I'm
quite sure Rio alone is not what limits Plan 9's popularity and usage
today.
Right. Maybe a major issue why I personally cannot really get much
the best way to piss off a linux dude who wakes up, updates his system,
goes to work, updates everything that isn't locked down, and then sit's you
in front of a "good box" ... is to say every two minutes "how do i get rid of
this gargoyle". was a funny day ... i showed him how the mouse didn't
w
On 3/6/07, Vester Thacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I apologize for offending you. But what ideas are you suggesting
that we migrate toward?
no, sorry, I was kind of short. No problem :-)
I actually agree with your points in many ways. I just don't know how
to get around the problem of
On 3/7/07, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
you're right. All those experiences I had with people when I tried to
show them Plan 9 were just my imagination. Sorry. Too many drugs
maybe.
Well, I apologize for offending you. But what ideas are you suggesting
that we migrate toward?
Transp
On 3/6/07, Vester Thacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyway, I hope that we can move past Rio being the bane of Plan 9. I'm
quite sure Rio alone is not what limits Plan 9's popularity and usage
today.
you're right. All those experiences I had with people when I tried to
show them Plan 9 were
On 3/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why do we expect our computer usage to require no sacrifices at all?
Geez, this thread is shite. We might as well be on an irc channel.
#plan9 on irc.oftc.net anyone?
I think the issue really comes down to a lack of educational material
On 3/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> fuck 'em!
>>
>>
>> this is not just a matter of "we are so smart, we get rio, and no one
>> else does, so F*** 'em!". I know lots of smart peope. One look at rio
>> is enough to put them off their feed, and to chase them away from Plan
>>
> Why do we expect our computer usage to require no sacrifices at all?
Also, Ron is barking up the wrong tree (with all due respect). Either
Plan 9 is good enough or it isn't, it is counter-productive to try to
shove it down the throat of unwilling users even when it may be
perfect for some embed
On 3/6/07, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/6/07, Skip Tavakkolian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i suggest F-Hue
well, marketing has never been a strong point of this group, although
I do think our sense of humor has no equal :-)
ron
"Use Plan 9... We've raised our standards, so u
On 3/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It makes a good excuse though. If it's not the licence, it's rio or
lack of X11 or .
I'll take the excuse du jour with a side of elitism, please, and easy
on the licensing!
John Floren
--
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhta
It makes a good excuse though. If it's not the licence, it's rio or
lack of X11 or .
--- Begin Message ---
>and [rio] is undoubtedly why plan9 remains obscure.
i think that's very unlikely to be the main reason, myself.--- End Message ---
On 3/6/07, Skip Tavakkolian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i suggest F-Hue
well, marketing has never been a strong point of this group, although
I do think our sense of humor has no equal :-)
ron
>and [rio] is undoubtedly why plan9 remains obscure.
i think that's very unlikely to be the main reason, myself.
.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/
or inferno
Reply-To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
On 3/6/07, matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
fuck 'em!
>
I think that's a great name for our next GUI
-eric
we could be a little less obvious and use the Father Ted variant--- Begin Message ---
On 3/6/07, matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
fuck 'em!
>
I think that's a great name for our next GUI
-eric--- End Message ---
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
