>If Apple can do it with MacOS X, then why can't we? What men have done, men can do. Why *should* we create a multi-user OS? What new ground does it break? I hate logging into machines, especially my own. I don't need password protection, I have armed guards standing by. (Everyone is paranoid, as they should be, but any protection on data should be done on the per-app level, not system wide, because only %5 or less of most people's data is really worth being under lock and key). I like booting up my OS and being ready to go. Everyone has their own reasons for following the BeOS route, mine was that it was the most Amiga-like OS and NOT a Linux system. If I want to be a power tripping mofo and have god-like control of users, I may as well break out my old HST modem and start a BBS. :) Hell, I don't even want to boot up an OS, I want to just power the machine on and off, and no waiting for silly file systems to "shut down", like any other stinkin' appliance. My point is, what's the goal here? If we want to "leave hooks" so multi-user support can be added on, fine. It doesn't have to all be thrown into R1 or R2...and can be left "as an exercise to the student", or create a 3rd party opportunity. > Peter . * * * . \|/ * * , . * ' * . . . * , * --*-- . ` * , . * , . David Sowsy . /|\ BeOS Rebel and Coder . * . http://dsowsy.nanorevolution.com . * . * . .