:-) Please use [OT] for Re: FYI: The Unix philosophy

[jkinz at kinz.org]

On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:00:06PM -0500, Ben Scott wrote:
> "Write programs that do one thing and do it well.  Write programs to
> work together.  Write programs that handle text streams, because that
> is a universal interface."  -- Doug McIlroy (inventor of Unix pipes;
> currently Adjunct Professor at NH's own Dartmouth College)
> 
> >From _The UNIX Philosophy_ by Mike Gancarz (a member of original X
> window system team):
>    Universal:
>    1. Small is beautiful.
>    2. Make each program do one thing well.
>    3. Build a prototype as soon as possible.
>    4. Choose portability over efficiency.
>    5. Store data in flat text files.
>    6. Use software leverage to your advantage.
>    7. Use shell scripts to increase leverage and portability.
>    8. Avoid captive user interfaces.
>    9. Make every program a filter.

<TONGUE SLIGHTLY IN CHEEK :-D >

To Ben and Maddog as well: 

Please do not bring these abandoned topics (UNIX Philosophy)up in a
Linux email list.  they have no place here.

I used to use SUN and AT&T workstations based on Motorola 68010
CPUs robustly configured  with 2 Meg of RAM.  These systems were
distinctly faster that the 1 GHz CPU with 512 MB of RAM I sit at
today.  (in terms of responsiveness to the GUI and CLI as well as
most tasks capable of being done by machines that size). Today's
systems, on a "pound for pound" of computing resources basis, are
overwhelmingly slow and stupid. The degree of RAM gluttony alone
seems unbelievable.

It is clear that the Linux movement, even KDE, has largely, if
not completely, abandoned the UNIX philosophy as its guiding
principle of software design.  Each new distro I see become more
and more Windows-like in its underlying design.

The example of GNOME choosing to have non-human-editable
configuration files is but a single instance in this waterfall of
movement. Another is GNOME requiring all changes to the
configuration information be done through the gconf program. 

I believe the goal having Linux be easy enough for "Aunt Tillie"
to use is not merely desirable but nearly a divine mandate.
However it was not necessary to abandon the design principles
that made the creation of Linux desirable in the first place. 

Today's Linux systems are increasingly evolving into nothing more
than (poor) copies of MS Windows systems. Hugely bloated and
lacking any of the formerly saving graces of the UNIX
design approach.

The Windows mindset has so completely devoured the mental
concept space of "computer science" that some CS graduates today
think that even things like the command shells  and X-Windows are
part of the operating system. 

Jeff "Me? Bitter? ME?" Kinz  

</TONGUE SLIGHTLY IN CHEEK :-D >


Note - the above posting is not to be taken at face value. 
Look at its wirth instead.