View Single Post
Old 10th December 2014
fn8t's Avatar
fn8t fn8t is offline
Real Name: Ego
Shell Scout
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Tao
Posts: 120
Default

I really like both Net and Open. I have different use scenarios for each.

I can't say anything negative about Open or the authority in its development process, other than attributes that are practical but yet still hindering. Practical negatives are viewed as positive (in my eye). This might be my stance on Theo's so called overbearing control and or general intolerance, if I actually knew personally that he was overbearing or unduly intolerant. If it accomplishes the goal, then it can't be that bad.

While I like Net, I can't say anything more certain about its development process. Different members of the Net group have admitted that the treatment Theo and others have received was an investment in bad karma. I have read a ton of "historical" email archives, and still feel there is some background information missing. What isn't missing is the improper treatment of persons due to some mentioned disagreements that are not likely the sum of the igniting issues.
One area about Net that leaves me questioning, is the member agreement contract. There is a clause about "private information" that seems excessive, but could be completely proper. Guess I don't know enough about anything to make any stone engraved judgments.

None of this actually addresses the concept of decaying operating systems. To some, Plan 9 is good and dead. To others DOS is dead and rotten. If you still use and develop on them, they are plenty alive enough for you. Dead or decaying might just mean not used by the majority or a slower level of maintenance toward satisfying modern expectations. If that is the case, I haven't been using a living operating system in a long time. Yet another concept of dead is, "Its dead to me". This is the case with my regard to Windows and Linux, regardless of their root strength globally.

This thread could go some interesting directions.
Reply With Quote