> +1. this is really an important point. think of all the mega person > years you could save by doing the simple, systemic things to make > the job of maintaining system easier.
You are missing an even more important issue here: imagine how much beneficial impact such a radical break with tradition would have had on the mindset of the community! But we're dealing with conservatism here and not with measurable improvements. Also, and I am on Charles' side on this, _who_ should have done this? Sun Microsystems, Microsoft? And how do we know that it has not been done, but was rejected? The technology is not driven by need but, surprise, surprise, by greed. And, most importantly, it is a complex blend of science and engineering with no moral compass and plenty of money. Is it surprising that it fails to address problems without profitable solutions? My beef with Charles, by the way - and I must have been guilty of the same sin as he - is not that he is mistaken, but that he formulated his criticism in an ambiguous manner, where it is necessary that it should be very clear which of two alternatives he is criticising. I simply wish there was less of that, specially on a mailing list where English is not everyone's mother tongue. Sometimes I can't resist the temptation to bring this to everyone's attention. No offence was intended and if some was taken, I apologize. Lucio.
