Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

kukuruku.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 616 posts

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#111

Post by michaelmrose »

pjmlp wrote: post #98
Arizhel wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>while lots of different, great ideas about computing and networks have been developed in the last 30 years. Using Unix is the computing equivalent of listening only to music by David Cassidy. The problem here is that there aren't a lot of alternatives. You could use Windows, which is like listening only to music by MC Hammer, or you could use a Mac, which is like listening only to music by Duran Duran. Because of so…

The thing is UNIX, by definition, is never going to move beyond its original design, meaning POSIX + C. Whereas Mac OS, Windows, iOS, Android, ChromeOS have moved into more productive language runtimes, with rich frameworks, improving safety across OS layers, even if they have a few bumps along the way.

What do you mean by unix in this context? Everything save for windows bears a strong kinship with Unix and every OS is more than capable of running additional runtimes and frameworks beyond C.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#112

Post by 7952 »

jondubois wrote: post #5

I think the problem is that Linux developers started abusing the Unix Philosophy to the point that you had to know about a lot of different programs in order to be productive - Sometimes, it's much more convenient if one program can do everything that you want it to do out of the box (it requires less understanding of the system). The Unix philosophy is essentially the opposite of the Apple philosophy. It gives you f…

Large monolithic apps can be an ecosystem in their own right that is broadly comparable to an OS. And it is common to find apps that adopt Unix philosophy out of necessity within the ecosystem. This is not obvious to an outsider, and requires an understanding of the domain.

A good example is ArcGIS which on the surface is ridiculously monolithic. But within the toolbox function are several hundred programs that do only one thing and are composable. This approach is also seen in video or image editing workflows where a user works with a particular set of tools. The main difference is that the programs use a types system that is appropriate to the domain rather than just text.

The OS only really exposes an interface for working with OS level objects. That sometimes aligns to a workflow but not always. And we should not expect disciplines to align their techniques to OS level objects if that is not a good fit for the actual domain.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#113

Post by Arizhel »

pjmlp wrote: post #98
Arizhel wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>while lots of different, great ideas about computing and networks have been developed in the last 30 years. Using Unix is the computing equivalent of listening only to music by David Cassidy. The problem here is that there aren't a lot of alternatives. You could use Windows, which is like listening only to music by MC Hammer, or you could use a Mac, which is like listening only to music by Duran Duran. Because of so…

The thing is UNIX, by definition, is never going to move beyond its original design, meaning POSIX + C. Whereas Mac OS, Windows, iOS, Android, ChromeOS have moved into more productive language runtimes, with rich frameworks, improving safety across OS layers, even if they have a few bumps along the way.

That's not true. Windows in particular is greatly limited by past design choices, such as filename limitations, the security model, the fact that many programs have to be run as administrator because that's how they were written years ago, etc.

There's nothing preventing you from running different language runtimes and such on Linux/Unix systems; people do it all the time. Have you not noticed Mono? It's been around for many years. Plus frameworks like Qt; that certainly wasn't around before the late 90s.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#114

Post by digi_owl »

nanodano wrote: post #48
randcraw wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Waayyy TMII (irrelevant). If the bottom-up compositional model for computing that largely originated with Unix is fading, this article doesn't go there, or suggest cause. Now, that's an article I'd like to read...

I wonder why the original comment you responded to got flagged. I read it and it was one of the best comments?

Because either people didn't get the reference, or fanboys all over the originator...

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#115

Post by zzzcpan »

pjmlp wrote: post #49

"We really are using a 1970s era operating system well past its sell-by date. We get a lot done, and we have fun, but let's face it, the fundamental design of Unix is older than many of the readers of Slashdot, while lots of different, great ideas about computing and networks have been developed in the last 30 years. Using Unix is the computing equivalent of listening only to music by David Cassidy." Rob Pike 2004, h…

The fundamental design of von Neumann architecture is even older and Unix can be treated as just another layer of abstraction on top of it. It cannot really get past its sell-by date.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#116

Post by salesguy222 »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #99
Arizhel wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>while lots of different, great ideas about computing and networks have been developed in the last 30 years. Using Unix is the computing equivalent of listening only to music by David Cassidy. The problem here is that there aren't a lot of alternatives. You could use Windows, which is like listening only to music by MC Hammer, or you could use a Mac, which is like listening only to music by Duran Duran. Because of so…

> which is like listening only to music by Duran Duran You say that like it were a bad thing.

i'm hoping you are being sarcastic, but i do not want to live in a world where i only listen to my favorite band

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#117

Post by mixedCase »

malcolmgreaves wrote: post #67
wyclif wrote: post #14

This article was written hastily, and I don’t want to further improve it. You’re lucky I wrote it. I feel so privileged to read this random guy's blog, and it's terrific that he eschews inflating his ego so well.

There's such a problem with immaturity in tech. It's frustrating because it creates barriers to learning from others. No self-respecting person is going to want to learn from someone who has a "holier than thou" or "I'm a rockstar" mindset.

Contrary to your beliefs, one can have both self-respect and a sense of humor.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#118

Post by grzm »

haylem wrote: post #109
mundo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^^^ Open incognito if you don't want to see jwz's NSFW salutations to HN readers...

Funny that the parent was flagged, even though the link is valid, and the parent's author is not at fault . Oh! The beauty of censorship by the masses. Now I can see why jwz would choose to take a stab at HN. He may be right, and even too kind. That flag is just sad...

As a sibling comment points out, the submission actually quotes from Richard Gabriel's Worse is Better. That, and the snarky tone of the comment may have been what caused people to downvote and/or flag the comment. 'swolchok could also have linked to the original, thus avoiding jwz's HN-referrer redirect.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#119

Post by redsummer »

I've always wondered why a new open-source OS has not arisen to claim the mantle of UNIX / Linux. There are so many ancient design decisions, piled up upon each other, which spawn millions of man-hours of frustration. It continues perhaps because of its esoteric nature. People don't want to throw away all the weird stuff they've learnt.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#120

Post by pjmlp »

Arizhel wrote: post #113
pjmlp wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is UNIX, by definition, is never going to move beyond its original design, meaning POSIX + C. Whereas Mac OS, Windows, iOS, Android, ChromeOS have moved into more productive language runtimes, with rich frameworks, improving safety across OS layers, even if they have a few bumps along the way.

That's not true. Windows in particular is greatly limited by past design choices, such as filename limitations, the security model, the fact that many programs have to be run as administrator because that's how they were written years ago, etc. There's nothing preventing you from running different language runtimes and such on Linux/Unix systems; people do it all the time. Have you not noticed Mono? It's been around…

Windows 10 already sorted out the filename limitations.

A few more releases and in around 10 years, Win32 will be drinking beers with Carbon.

Mono and Qt don't change the architecture of UNIX and their adoption across UNIX variants isn't a game changer.

Post reply on HN