From: "Scott Mansfield" > >> 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? Maybe lots of articles? :-) > 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. True! GNOME by simplicity, KDE by feature availability! > IM[not so]HO these > projects attempt to clone the 'doze "experience" in their own > interpretation of same. Hmm... doesn't OBOS or Linux or Windows or Solaris tries to do the same thing? A OS... > OBOS? It's about empowerment. Right! By simplicity! > 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. :-))) Do you think a user cares about that!? I think Linux is your environment! BeOS is to gentile for you... BTW, you like gdb more than DDD, don't you? :-) > 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 don't, users will get confused! A balance MUST be found between usability and availability. For a CLI geek that you are, I not surprised you think that way. I bet you love dot files! :-) Users don't! > >> 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*] Really? I didn't know about that! Can you please give me the path to that file!? Regarding Microsoft... beside their monopoly policy... they did lots of good things. > >> 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? Nothing, really! ... if you use special scripting support like BeAPI offers. But if you use a background session to carry out operations through CLI apps, THEN I can say that what you do is a POOR/CHEAP product, and more... a lazy programmer. That can be done, and work real nice... but I DON'T want to see that in OBOS!!! I see in BeOS, a remarkable design, made from scratch, and for that I LOVE IT; it's NOT like Linux where a lots of apps are built one above other. ...remember the discussion we had 2-3 weeks ago about making the GUI nicer! We all agreed that for making a thing for OBOS you must do it the right way! OBOS is will be USER friendly, NOT geek friendly! > 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. Hey! That's what I don't like about some people. You say something, and then one comes and digest all meanings of that phrase. How the hell could I be referring to complex tasks like compilers!? I was talking about GENERAL apps! Do you consider good a OBOS program that uses: "ls -l | grep xxxx" to find some files via a criteria, or use PERL regular expressions support, etc. I consider this POOR programming. If you want to do one thing right you might want to search the net for a, possibly free, library that supports easy manipulation of strings or one that works very nice with regular expressions! That's a good product; a product that comes with incorporated features, not relying on outside help. > 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. I *totally* agree! But, if one's "most efficient, reproducible manner" is scripting with CLI apps, then... he's not "A *smart* developer ". Adi.