🚀 go-pugleaf

dkomo@cris.com wrote:
>Jim Williams <williams@tiac.net> wrote:
>>
>>If we were to go back a few revolutions on this thread, my original
>>point was that given the potential of this technology there really hasn't
>>been a whole lot of progress over the last 15 years.
>>
>
>Agreed.  Then why are you promoting Linux?  Is Linux supposed to be your 
>strange version of "progress?"  Aren't you the one that complained about
>lack of originality in hardware design not so long ago?
>
>There isn't a single idea in Linux/Unix that's any newer than a decade 
>ago.  The main architecture of this ancient (some would say classical) OS 
>dates from the Sixties and Seventies.
>


Because there hasn't really been *any* progress in the last 15-20 years
and I think we should go back to the stuff that worked and start over.

Actually, there have been quite a few minor refinements -- most of which
are reflected in Linux.  There just haven't been any great technical 
leaps forward. (GUIs might have brought the computer to the populus, but
there isn't a whole lot of technical value to them.)

There are also some interesting developments which don't seem to be 
making it out into the marketplace, such as neural nets.

-- 
Jim Williams.

Find a Linux User Group near you: 
http://www.tiac.net/users/williams/lugnuts/

Buy Linux brand UNIX!