Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote on 2003-06-03: > hmm... beyond the questionable ethics of M$, I beleive that the > impressive design has a lot to do with the crappiness of the implmentation. > > Unix and Unix like systems such as Linux that share the same design > philosophy are 'worse is better' systems. I can't really call M$ a > 'Right Thing' system, but youyr description of the internal design does > invoke that image. > I think Gilad has roughly the same POV as I'm about to say but anyway. I'd like to argue that the `Worse Is Better`_ term/concept is somewhat misleading. It seems to be usually taken to imply that the Right Thing should inevitably be a big feature-rich design with each API having precisely the dozen option it should have according to the careful design meditation, carefully-crafted ACLs that allow precisely what should be allowed but no more, optimized binary formats and interfaces between all parts, etc.
But there is no reason why should it be so! Unix experience suggests that the Right Thing must be simple (and fun!) to understand, debug and use. A system that is too complex to understand and untransparent to debugging is a Wrong Thing, period. . _Worse Is Better: http://www.dreamsongs.com/WorseIsBetter.html -- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
