[openbeos] Re: scheduler/reminder

  • From: Scott Mansfield <thephantom@xxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:47:59 -0700


On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 15:54 America/Los_Angeles, Adi Oanca wrote:


From: "François Revol" <revol@xxxxxxx>
Selon Vassilis Perantzakis <vaspervnp@xxxxxxxx>:

We shouldn't make another Linux... BeOS is a GUI oriented OS. The
terminal is there because JLG chose to have POSIX compatibility.

Maybe not for R1, but for R1.1 there should be a GUI front-end
for every Terminal service. I like it the hard way too, but I
will not convince too many of my friends to use
OBOS if it is not heavily GUI.

Vassilis

BeOS is not about only GUI.
It's about GUI which makes things easy, but doesn't hide them
just for the sake of it.

I disagree here... Hiding some things makes it more easy. Compare GNOME
to KDE for example.

Huh? How is comparing GNOME and KDE relevant to our project? Did I miss something here?


Forgive my impudence but that's like the proverbial "Apples and Oranges" comparison. KDE and GNOME: each of these OSS projects strive towards achieving a common goal in their own way. IM[not so]HO these projects attempt to clone the 'doze "experience" in their own interpretation of same.

OBOS? It's about empowerment.

Ok, corporate double-speak aside (casual reference to 1984)...

All of these projects have their strengths and weaknesses. So do we, we're not infallible.

Correct me if I'm wrong here and PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't be shy about it.

Generally speaking from a LONG-time experience as an embedded U*ix/Linux/OSS and recent initiate to OBOS developer: I can carry out whatever tasks I see fit within any "Desktop's" sandbox that are at my disposal. I don't give a large rodent's posterior about what's different in the execution, as long as the the end results are consistent. Give me a pointy-clicky thing that I can grok and a large black window with readable monochrome-green text to type stuff in to and I'll crank out code till the end of time, so to speak -- IOW: I'm one happy developer.

From this developer's perspective said projects strive towards empowering the user via "The Desktop" and "User Experience" without being encumbered by some nameless, faceless corporate entity, and without "Getting in the Way." We can do better than that. We will be better.

See what I mean?

Carrying this metaphor to conclusion, we shouldn't try to constrain our customers to what we as a group perceive as the "Best Way" to do things -- something that I feel you seek to attain by restricting our customer's tasks by abstraction through a GUI.

If you have a look at the Terminal,
you'll see many things have a CLI counterpart, even the CD
player. (hint: /bin/play)

Does Windows have such a thing?

Yes windoze does. Please pardon me, I feel dirty for even the slightest M$ advocation here, but one can launch any 'doze program from the CLI. [Ugh. Feel dirty. Must shower now. *shudder*]


For that matter, the same holds true for Mac OS X via the 'open' command.

Dont forget CLI isn't only about geeks who want to make it
hard.

:-) Sorry, that the way I see it!


It's also about scripting...

Yeah, for lazy programmers! :-)

Playing the devil's advocate here...


Hey! Wait a minute!!! I make my living by making other programmer's jobs easier. What's wrong with using a script to carry out a repetitive, complex task? Is reproducibility cast to the four winds? WTF? Do you run 'jam' and parse its output from a GUI app during your course as an OBOS developer? A script has the potential of being easily digestible and maintainable in a clear-text kind of way. FWIW: "Lazy" programmers don't survive long in the field before they're called to task and subsequently terminated; M$ employees notwithstanding.

A *smart* developer uses the best tools at her/his disposal to carry out said dev's final objective in the most efficient, reproducible manner possible without prejudice to the vehicle used to reach the finished product.

Yours Sincerely,
Scott Mansfield

Other related posts: