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

The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

web.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 316 posts

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#231

Post by seagreen »

Philipp__ wrote: post #34

I like to cover myself with some crazy question and think about them. For example, what would look like the thing that would make people go "oh this looks good enough to replace UNIX". Don't get me wrong, I am big fan of UNIX, but I hope I will be alive around the time(but I doubt that) when we will see some new thing which will make UNIX feel dated. Now, some of you might jump and say "Oh, but UNIX already feels dat…

Well, the browser already did replace Unix for most people=( Presumably we'd be trying to design something good and not awful though, so lets not stop there. But it does give us a starting point:

+ one click installation of applications

+ applications are always up to date

+ applications are sandboxed

Then, since we want users to be able to tinker:

+ the source for all software installed through this mechanism is available

+ optional binary caches NixOS style so it's not slow

And while we're talking about NixOS:

+ immutable package directory so you can rollback at will

And then on to data storage, which is my favorite topic:

+ defaults to tags instead of a hierarchy for organization

+ everything is schema'd, so a file saying it's a contact entry or whatever actually has to be that thing

+ data is immutable by default, so undo and versioning can be built-in (you could still turn this off for certain tasks like video-editing where immutability isn't feasible)

I have more thoughts on data storage here if anyone's interested: https://juniorschematics.com/

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#232

Post by apercu »

dahart wrote: post #105
dsmithatx wrote: post #73

When I read this 20 years ago I would never have believed I'd be typing this on a Mac laptop running yet another Unix variant. This line is now so funny... As for me? I switched to the Mac. No more grep, no more piping, no more SED scripts. Just a simple, elegant life: “Your application has unexpectedly quit due to error number –1. OK?”

Ha! I switched to Mac so I could have pipes, grep and bash. I personally believe a big reason for the Mac resurgence has to do with the switch to UNIX. I was on Windows using Cygwin for years before anyone I knew was using a Mac. Then OSX came out, and all of a sudden all the academics I knew switched to Mac, and a couple years later most of the professional programmers I knew had switched. The great thing about a Ma…

As soon as I could install MySQL and Apache on OS X I had to have it. I no longer needed an internet/SSH connection to code.

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#234

Post by derefr »

dahart wrote: post #187
problems wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bluh, don't get me started on Finder. Icons in directories would randomly be overlapping just because I hadn't been in them in a while and new files were added, they added this weird tagging system with colors that just doesn't make sense to me at all, it randomly thinks I want to view some sort of "recently used files and some random shit" list instead of my homedir. I don't know what the devs of it were thinking. E…

The finder is a wart. Apple does have a lot of good UI elsewhere, but the finder needs an overhaul so bad it hurts. Know what drives me the most nuts? That there's a single default key (Enter) to rename a folder, while you have to use a key chord (Command-O) to enter a folder. It's so backwards, renaming is not something I spend even remotely as much time doing as moving around. That's not to mention the so completel…

> (Command-O) to enter a folder.

I use Command+Down, which opens Finder shell-objects generally. It's the "descend" to Command+Up's "ascend."

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#235

Post by DonHopkins »

al452 wrote: post #52
bjourne wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't do opengl efficiently over the network. At least xorg can't. Most applications uses opengl these days. For me, I've been using Linux fulltime for the last 15 years and I have never, not even once, had the need to connect to a remote X11 server. ssh has always been enough for me.

> the need to connect to a remote X11 server You mean client, not server. (ducks for cover)

> the need to connect to a remote X11 server

You mean X-Windows, not X11.

(ducks for cover)

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#236

Post by pjmlp »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #212
pjmlp wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming one has the access rights for it. I do occasionally ssh into boxes were I am a lame user without compilers installed.

Wget or scp? Paste a binary into vi and save it?

You need to compile it first for the UNIX that you are accessing, and that is assuming IT hasn't locked down the ability to execute unauthorized binaries.

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#237

Post by Aloha »

michrassena wrote: post #195
Philipp__ wrote: post #34

I like to cover myself with some crazy question and think about them. For example, what would look like the thing that would make people go "oh this looks good enough to replace UNIX". Don't get me wrong, I am big fan of UNIX, but I hope I will be alive around the time(but I doubt that) when we will see some new thing which will make UNIX feel dated. Now, some of you might jump and say "Oh, but UNIX already feels dat…

I find it hard to imagine a world which in a 100 years Unix-derived systems are prevalent let alone running everything from phones to supercomputers. I can't imagine what would come along, but whatever it is will eventually be just as crufty, because that's just the way of things. What I'd really like to know, what is Unix, at the core. I know POSIX defines certain standards, but what can we rip out and still call wh…

I dont see a world in 100 years where anything is unix derived - but that doesnt mean it wont be Unix compatible.

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#238

Post by DonHopkins »

bjourne wrote: post #37
xyzzy123 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but try and figure out how you'd do better... efficient.ly. Over the network...

You can't do opengl efficiently over the network. At least xorg can't. Most applications uses opengl these days. For me, I've been using Linux fulltime for the last 15 years and I have never, not even once, had the need to connect to a remote X11 server. ssh has always been enough for me.

Sure you can, it's just called WebGL! ;)

They just added another layer, flipped the words "server" and "client" around, and added more hardware.

Now you run the web browser client on top of the local window system server, through shared memory, without using the network. And both the browser and GPU are locally programmable!

And then the local web browser client accesses remote web servers over the network, instead of ever using X11's networking ability.

One way of looking at it in the X11 sense is that a remote app running in the web server acts as a client of the local window server's display and GPU hardware, by downloading JavaScript code to run in the web browser (acting as a programmable middleman near the display), and also shader code to run in the window server's GPU.

Trying to pigeonhole practices like distributed network and GPU programming into simplistic dichotomies like "client/server," or partition user interface programming into holy trinities like "model/view/controller," just oversimplifies reality and unnecessarily limits designs.

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#239

Post by slrz »

michrassena wrote: post #122
cat199 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

still worth checking out? or just worth checking out? The coherency of VMS (and the VAX platform) is quite amazing - Coherent command line interfaces, API's, documentation, hardware, and software, even down to coherent part numbering made by a single company, from small workstations up to larger scale minis, and nearly transparent clustering. I mention VAX specifically, since by the time Alpha arrived, DEC was compet…

I've installed and played around with VMS on an emulator and even on my own VaxStation, but never used it in a production environment. I'm sure real world usage left a lot to be desired, but my impressions are that VMS as a product was well-rounded, feels complete as if there aren't a lot of loose ends. In contrast to the unix philosophy, VMS feels DESIGNED, as if the people working on it had a coherent idea of the w…

Which emulator did you use? Simh?

Re: The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]

#240

Post by marssaxman »

seagreen wrote: post #231
Philipp__ wrote: post #34

I like to cover myself with some crazy question and think about them. For example, what would look like the thing that would make people go "oh this looks good enough to replace UNIX". Don't get me wrong, I am big fan of UNIX, but I hope I will be alive around the time(but I doubt that) when we will see some new thing which will make UNIX feel dated. Now, some of you might jump and say "Oh, but UNIX already feels dat…

Well, the browser already did replace Unix for most people=( Presumably we'd be trying to design something good and not awful though, so lets not stop there. But it does give us a starting point: + one click installation of applications + applications are always up to date + applications are sandboxed Then, since we want users to be able to tinker: + the source for all software installed through this mechanism is ava…

"Applications are always up to date" is a bug, not a feature. Updates sometimes break things, and the inevitable UI changes require adaptation. The last thing I want is an automatic update that changes my tools and breaks my workflow right in the middle of some important project. I'll update manually, when I feel like it and have the time to deal with it.
Post reply on HN