🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <root.827273089@rscernix>, danpop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop) wrote:

> >That's your problem. If the memory model was the pinnacle of the 
> >usefulness of an OS we'd all be using Unix. I wonder why we're not?
> 
> Mostly because you don't have the necessary skills :-)  And because
> Microsoft Office doesn't run (natively) under Unix :-)

That is sorta the point. 

You are wrong (specifically), I have all the skills to be able to use
Unix, and have used it - VMS, RDos, Arts, Pick, Dos, etc. But most users
do not - nor should they waste their time learning to interact with a
computer in a less efficient way (for all but the top 1%). The computer
should use ITS resources to make it easier for people to do THEIR work!
That is the whole point of HAVING a computer!

That is WHY CLI's have been failing. Most users recognize that altruism in
that statement. Many CLI users do not!

> Yes, but it's memory protection and multitasking which are currently the
> limiting factors in MacOS and Windows.  This is why it makes a lot of
> sense to talk about how they're handled by various versions of these 
> popular OS's.

Except that users do not care about specifics again - nor should they.

If your car has double wishbone suspension or fully independant is
irrelevant in 99% of the cases - what you care about is HANDLING! Wether
it is a diesel, wankel or traditional is also irrelevant - you care more
if you can get the fuel you need cheaply and readily, what its milage is,
and its maintainability/performance.

Now apply that to computers. Full memory protection and PMT are good
things - but they are not the total of the car. The fact that Unix is used
so little (despite having those things) and DOS sold so well (despite NOT
having those things) is proof that most users DO NOT CARE, or are not
willing to pay the price (at that time).

People want stability, but they are not always willing to sacrafice the
other costs. (Performance drops, memory penalties, etc.). 

Now that resource costs are coming down. And we can pay for the lost MIPS,
and add the extra memory, they are becoming viable for home/buisiness
computers. But they were NOT viable (or worth their costs) for MOST users
for the past 10 years! The reason why Unix and NT (combined) have been
relegated to specialty tasks, and less than a small percentage of apples
marketshare .  NOW it is becoming viable - and guess what, the MacOS is
getting those features. Big suprise. 

In other words MacOS is being UserDriven... Unix and NT where technology
(engineer) driven. Which is more in the users best interests?!?
-- 
David K. Every
Sr. Software Engineer
Jostens Learning Corp.