> >Fred wrote: > > > >> Like the people who come up w/ a 'great idea' which is > >> really a way to make R1 to look more like Win XP and less > >> like R5. > > > >Careful here, Fred, because R5 is not the be-all and end-all. > >It has severe shortcomings that I for instance would not > >like to see repeated in R1. Furthermore, the time R1 comes > >out, R5 will be hopelessly outdated, UI and otherwise. Sure, > >the kits/server idea is still cool, but things move on, and > >I guess I and others are just fearing that by the time R1 is > >out, it won't pull any eyeballs anymore. > > Agreed. And it has been publically said (and beaten into the ground, > IMHO) that R1 is the start, not the end. No one wants to produce > R1 and hold it up as the most glorious thing ever on earth. > We want to produce it and hold it up and say "here is a platform > on which to build cooler things". > > >That said... I fully understand why R1 is coming out the way > >it is. I'm just afraid it won't be enough. > > I think that everyone feels that way, to some degree. That is why > it is so important to get the foundation right and quickly. So that > we > can do the other cool things. What is also the case, though, is that we already *have* R5. It exists. I'm running it. If R5 is equivalent to R1, then we have R1. So why not start building the cool things now? Sure, it would be nice to have it all open source. But we can, at the same time as we replace those components, make them better. There is no reason to simply go blindly cloning things if you are not planning on improving them in the process. -Nathan -- Fortune Cookie Says: "It's a dog-eat-dog world out there, and I'm wearing Milkbone underwear."