Re:The Plan 9 Effect or why you should not fix it if it isn'...
by zxcvcxz on Saturday May 28, 2016 @01:15PM
(#11792402)
> the worse a system is, the more popular it is in general
That's true of non-unixy systems too, see: Windows.
And by that same logic, OS X is the worst Unix.
A whole bunch of tools thrown together is pretty much the definition of an operating system.
Re:The Plan 9 Effect or why you should not fix it if it isn'...
by rayiner on Saturday May 28, 2016 @01:32PM
(#11792457)
OS X is not the worst UNIX. Darwin is kind of a shit kernel, but the user land is way more sensibly designed than your typical Linux distro (which is, as OP said, a random collection of junk).
Re:The Plan 9 Effect or why you should not fix it if it isn'...
by madmax96 on Saturday May 28, 2016 @04:08PM
(#11793213)
That's because OS X's user land is based on BSD. BSD in general is a much more well thought out UNIX-like OS than Linux. When I made the switch a couple of years back, I was surprised at how simply everything fit together compared to my experiences in the Linux space.
Re:The Plan 9 Effect or why you should not fix it if it isn'...
by tptacek on Saturday May 28, 2016 @02:19PM
(#11792675)
For desktops systems, maybe, but there's a reason almost nobody delivers SAAS stuff on Darwin, even as some do deliver on Windows.
Re:The Plan 9 Effect or why you should not fix it if it isn'...
by iris-digital on Saturday May 28, 2016 @04:07PM
(#11793210)
Except for package management.
It says "no one, in the unix world". People outside of the unix world are not in the unix world. The point is, unix became very popular despite being bad (or perhaps because of being bad). Even within unix, the worse a system is, the more popular it is in general (see a typical linux distro full of randomly tossed together junk).