Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ukma!uflorida!haven!udel!udccvax1!cygnus From: cygnus@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (Marc Cygnus) Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers Subject: Re: Clean Design vs. Source Code Summary: heh. Keywords: DOS, kernel, OS Message-ID: <5529@udccvax1.acs.udel.EDU> Date: 19 Jan 90 23:17:18 GMT References: <598@lectroid.sw.stratus.com> Reply-To: cygnus@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (Marc Cygnus) Followup-To: alt.religion.computers Distribution: na Organization: The Lab Rats Lines: 36 In article <598@lectroid.sw.stratus.com> lennox@paris.sw.stratus.com (Craig Scott Lennox) writes: > ... >but I've gotten quite used to kernel-hacking DOS. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >What do you think ...is it better to have a badly-designed, kludgey OS that you ^^ >have the source code to, or better to have a well-designed OS whose innermost ^^ >workings are a mystery. From a hacker's point of view. > > ouchouch. `kernel' hacking? Dos doesn't _have_ a kernel. ...and 'OS'? Dos is most _certainly_ NOT an operating system. It's a bloody MONITOR!! :-) personally, your point i think is rather a good one. i have to work with dos quite a bit and yes, i really like being able to hack around braindamage that i can pinpoint in source. unfortunately, that's a selfish point of view, since well-designed systems keep average users (who aren't programmers and don't have the slightest inclination to ever thinking about being one) from having to deal with system level stuff. ah well. >| Craig Scott Lennox -- Stratus Computer - Marlborough, MA | >| Dyslexic Existentialism: "Is there a dog?" | >| Find out what I really said -- send for your free decoder ring! | -marcus- -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Opinions expressed above are not necessarily those of anyone in particular." `...but do YOU own a | ARPA: cygnus@vax1.acs.udel.edu homemade 6ft Tesla?' | UUCP: {yourpick}!cfg!udel!udccvax1!cygnus