Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn <gwyn>)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Unix, Unixpeople, Usenix - from a non-compunerd's point of view...
Message-ID: <1971@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 20:07:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.1971
Posted: Mon Oct  7 20:07:00 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 9-Oct-85 06:41:31 EDT
References: <97@tekadg.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 29

Well, that article really doesn't deserve much of a response,
but anyway:

I agree that sloppy workmanship should not be tolerated,
although (official) UNIX is not necessarily worse than
many other OSes in this regard.  (Yes, some of us have
used other OSes.  Indeed, some of the people behind UNIX
were working in computing before there WERE departments
of Computer Science.)  One "problem" is that there has been
a lot of free exchange of user-written code in the UNIX
community, much more so than I have seen for other OSes.
This is both good (if you get some use out of it) and bad
(if you have to maintain it).  Now that UNIX is becoming
commercial, there is much less of this "problem".

The idea that an operating system should closely reflect
the underlying hardware architecture is so unenlightened
as to make one wonder whether the flamer has read any of
the classic papers on the subject.

I strongly disagree with the idea that computer workers
should not enjoy what they do.  UNIX system software is
much more INTERESTING than usual, since the people who
developed it cared about their work.  The image projected
of boring, stuffy meetings attended by people in three-
piece suits (UniForum is closer than USENIX to that ideal)
and mountains of dull documentation aimed at the reader
who cannot conceptualize does not seem to be a desirable
goal to me!