Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Operating Systems as Houses Summary: An extended analogy--operating sytems are forms of housing Distribution: World Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY From: aje9383@osfmail.isc.rit.edu (Andrew Erickson) NNTP-Posting-Host: grace.isc.rit.edu X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: grace.isc.rit.edu Message-ID: <38b216e0@news.isc.rit.edu> Date: 21 Feb 2000 23:56:00 -0500 X-Trace: 21 Feb 2000 23:56:00 -0500, grace.isc.rit.edu Lines: 108 XPident: aje9383 X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.21.4.100 XPident: Unknown Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.cwix.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kodak.com!news-nysernet-16.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.isc.rit.edu!aje9383 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:50123 I've often seen operating systems related to different cars. I think a better analogy is different forms of housing; tell me what you think. (My regrets if I fail to mention your favorite OS. I'm still a youngun and haven't seen even a small fraction of everything. In particular, a vast landscape of mainframe OSs is beyond my intellectual horizons.) Apple (II) DOS 3.3 is a picnic shelter. It does one thing, and it does it fairly well, but it's not really livable as a dwelling. It is quite similar to several other disk loaders from the era. CP/M is a tent. It's small, it's simple, and it provides shelter. For some sorts of things, a tent (like CP/M) is ideal--backpacking, for one example. MS-DOS is a bit bigger and fancier tent, but (despite hearing otherwise from time to time) it still seems a lot like a tent. ProDos, for those who like Apple II systems, is probably also a tent, but quite a different design--perhaps a pup tent ranther than a dome tent. MacOS is like an airstream trailer. It's expensive, it has a fanatical following, and it always looks quite the same. In general, it's a well built unit, but it's not particularly usable as a permant home. Things that it does, it does well. Asthetics are very important, too. Windows (3.11) is a pop-up camper. It combines the drawbacks of a tent with the drawbacks of a trailer, while providing only few benefits from either one. Windows 95/98 is a rather ordinary travel trailer. It's small, not too effecient, and generally tries to be an airstream trailer without quite succeeding. It's also more popular than an airstream. Although rather difficult, it is possible to live in a travel trailer most of the time. Nobody would really want to, however. Windows NT is a mobile home--half house, half travel trailer. It's not the best lodging possible, but it is better than a travel trailer and a common sight. UNIX (in a broad sense) is an old farmhouse. It has additions which go off at odd places and at odd angles, which are more or less maintained. There are five bathrooms scattered around, but the two with the showers are on a different floor from the majority of the bedrooms. It is hard to heat evenly, as there is not much insulation in many areas (but note that the most recent addition is well insulated) and the main oil-fired boiler is somewhat overtaxed. The gas hot air furnace which heats some of the house does work well, however. In the UNIX house, there are two or three ways to get between any two rooms, but often all of them force one to climb up two flights of stairs and down one (or vice-versa). To a newcomer, the UNIX house seems very confused and random; but one gets used to it after awhile, and somehow thinks (or assumes) that it is not all that unusual, unnatural, innefficient, or odd. The UNIX house does need a fair amount of maintenance, so owners of UNIX houses tend not to spend too much time admiring or interacting with other houses; they are forced to rely on the owners of other UNIX houses to help them keep the house in good repair. Although all UNIX houses are similar, one cannot find two which are identical to each other. NeXTStep started out as a UNIX house, but it underwent quite a thorough remodeling and is thereby much improved and much more livable. VMS houses are probably something like southern plantation mansions. A VMS house is made of good, solid bricks and stones, and is immovable in the face of tornados, hurricanes, and wars. Inside, one finds a strong division between the portions of the house wherein the servants perform their duties and those wherein the master's family lives and entertains their guests. Everything in the VMS house works like clockwork. Every action has been refined over a long time, and life changes slowly. QNX and other realtime operating systems are rather like an information booth or an ice cream cone stand. They work very well for the purposes for which they were designed, but fall short for anything else. No one wants to live in an information booth--just work there. Plan 9, Inferno, and other such research OSs are rather like the "house of the future" which nobody actually lives in. Instead, people examine them to gain ideas for designing new houses or improving old houses. A very well-designed "house of the future" may eventually become a common house of the (future) present, but it generally doesn't happen. Terminals, especially X terminals, are rather like apartments; although not houses, they do still provide shelter for many people. Some people would rather live in a tent than rent an apartment, despite the obvious advantages of an apartment over a tent. WebTV terminals are like motel rooms; they work like apartments, but to an even greater extent. What is strangely missing is an everyday ranch operating system. Maybe BeOS will end up filling that void; it's kind of hard to tell, but it's a strong possibility in my mind. Another strange thing is that the UNIX house owners somehow think that, by painting their houses modern colors and installing a new entry door, they can make their house modern and appealing to everyday people. The real problem, of course, is that the UNIX houses have been extended too far and too haphazardly beyond their original design goals. (Although I picked on UNIX homeowners particularly, other cliques share some of their delusions. WinNT owners, for instance, frequently notice how much better their houses are than trailers and tents, and that they are more efficient than UNIX houses; but they fail to observe the parts where their own homes fall short. Unlike actual physical houses, those who inhabit operating systems don't generally have reason to tour other habitations, and thus assume that their own are nearly ideal.) Comments? Agreement/disagreement? -- Andrew Erickson ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Operating Systems as Houses References: <38b216e0@news.isc.rit.edu> Distribution: World Organization: Plethora . Net - More Net, Less Spam! X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test72 (19 April 1999) From: seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach) Lines: 31 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 05:53:14 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.166.146.8 X-Complaints-To: abuse@plethora.net X-Trace: ptah.visi.com 951198794 205.166.146.8 (Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:53:14 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:53:14 CST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!ptah.visi.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:50151 In article <38b216e0@news.isc.rit.edu>, Andrew Erickson wrote: >Comments? Agreement/disagreement? I think you vastly overestimate the amount of management time that goes into a Unix box. I decided to apply patches to my "main" server, so I applied the patches, built a new kernel, and rebooted with it. That's my 5 minutes of downtime (and about 10 minutes of total maintenance time) for about 7 months. Sure, you can get systems which do better, but it's not nearly as bad as you make it sound. I think you should have said There are at least a few ways from any room to any other room. Mostly, you find ways that require you to go up or down stairs, but the experienced homeowner will generally find that: 1. You don't really need to go to the other room, because there's a copy of the thing you need right here. 2. There's a more direct way to the other room. 3. There's a decent map on the wall. I won't call Unix docs *good*, but I'll say they're a hell of a lot better than anything I've seen from the "live" competitors. (I admit that older docs were frequently *MUCH* better, and I miss them.) -s -- Copyright 2000, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / seebs@plethora.net C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon! Consulting & Computers: http://www.plethora.net/ Get paid to surf! No spam. http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=GZX636 ###### From: jvarela@nospam.com (John Varela) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Operating Systems as Houses Date: 22 Feb 2000 16:31:35 GMT Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <38b216e0@news.isc.rit.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: a5.f7.55.75 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: ProNews/2 Version 1.50á1/02 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.icl.net!news-MUC.ecrc.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.mindspring.net!firehose.mindspring.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:50184 On Tue, 22 Feb 2000 04:56:00, aje9383@osfmail.isc.rit.edu (Andrew Erickson) wrote: > (My regrets if I fail to mention your favorite OS. I'm still a youngun > and haven't seen even a small fraction of everything. In particular, a > vast landscape of mainframe OSs is beyond my intellectual horizons.) You omitted OS/2. May I suggest it's like one of the ranch houses that sprang up during the Eisenhower and Kennedy eras? It was in many ways better than pre-War and early post-War housing, having all the modern conveniences of the day, but is now kind of dated and of course doesn't conform to the latest fads, like huge kitchens and bathrooms. But the location is good, it more than meets all the basic needs, the plantings are mature, and there are those who love it. -- John "who lives in a 1962 ranch house" Varela jvarela at mindspring dot com ###### From: "Phil Howell" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers References: <38b216e0@news.isc.rit.edu> Subject: Re: Operating Systems as Houses Lines: 123 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Message-ID: <5xpt4.33465$3b6.160958@ozemail.com.au> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:44:12 +1100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.102.206.2 X-Trace: ozemail.com.au 951461057 203.102.206.2 (Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:44:17 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:44:17 EST Organization: OzEmail Pty Ltd, Australia Distribution: world Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.concentric.net!newsfeed.ozemail.com.au!ozemail.com.au!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:50363 Andrew Erickson wrote in message <38b216e0@news.isc.rit.edu>... >I've often seen operating systems related to different cars. I think a >better analogy is different forms of housing; tell me what you think. > >(My regrets if I fail to mention your favorite OS. I'm still a youngun >and haven't seen even a small fraction of everything. In particular, a >vast landscape of mainframe OSs is beyond my intellectual horizons.) > >Apple (II) DOS 3.3 is a picnic shelter. It does one thing, and it does >it fairly well, but it's not really livable as a dwelling. It is quite >similar to several other disk loaders from the era. > >CP/M is a tent. It's small, it's simple, and it provides shelter. For >some sorts of things, a tent (like CP/M) is ideal--backpacking, for one >example. MS-DOS is a bit bigger and fancier tent, but (despite hearing >otherwise from time to time) it still seems a lot like a tent. ProDos, >for those who like Apple II systems, is probably also a tent, but quite >a different design--perhaps a pup tent ranther than a dome tent. > >MacOS is like an airstream trailer. It's expensive, it has a fanatical >following, and it always looks quite the same. In general, it's a well >built unit, but it's not particularly usable as a permant home. Things >that it does, it does well. Asthetics are very important, too. > >Windows (3.11) is a pop-up camper. It combines the drawbacks of a tent >with the drawbacks of a trailer, while providing only few benefits from >either one. > >Windows 95/98 is a rather ordinary travel trailer. It's small, not too >effecient, and generally tries to be an airstream trailer without quite >succeeding. It's also more popular than an airstream. Although rather >difficult, it is possible to live in a travel trailer most of the time. >Nobody would really want to, however. > >Windows NT is a mobile home--half house, half travel trailer. It's not >the best lodging possible, but it is better than a travel trailer and a >common sight. > >UNIX (in a broad sense) is an old farmhouse. It has additions which go >off at odd places and at odd angles, which are more or less maintained. >There are five bathrooms scattered around, but the two with the showers >are on a different floor from the majority of the bedrooms. It is hard >to heat evenly, as there is not much insulation in many areas (but note >that the most recent addition is well insulated) and the main oil-fired >boiler is somewhat overtaxed. The gas hot air furnace which heats some >of the house does work well, however. In the UNIX house, there are two >or three ways to get between any two rooms, but often all of them force >one to climb up two flights of stairs and down one (or vice-versa). To >a newcomer, the UNIX house seems very confused and random; but one gets >used to it after awhile, and somehow thinks (or assumes) that it is not >all that unusual, unnatural, innefficient, or odd. The UNIX house does >need a fair amount of maintenance, so owners of UNIX houses tend not to >spend too much time admiring or interacting with other houses; they are >forced to rely on the owners of other UNIX houses to help them keep the >house in good repair. Although all UNIX houses are similar, one cannot >find two which are identical to each other. > >NeXTStep started out as a UNIX house, but it underwent quite a thorough >remodeling and is thereby much improved and much more livable. > >VMS houses are probably something like southern plantation mansions. A >VMS house is made of good, solid bricks and stones, and is immovable in >the face of tornados, hurricanes, and wars. Inside, one finds a strong >division between the portions of the house wherein the servants perform >their duties and those wherein the master's family lives and entertains >their guests. Everything in the VMS house works like clockwork. Every >action has been refined over a long time, and life changes slowly. > >QNX and other realtime operating systems are rather like an information >booth or an ice cream cone stand. They work very well for the purposes >for which they were designed, but fall short for anything else. No one >wants to live in an information booth--just work there. > >Plan 9, Inferno, and other such research OSs are rather like the "house >of the future" which nobody actually lives in. Instead, people examine >them to gain ideas for designing new houses or improving old houses. A >very well-designed "house of the future" may eventually become a common >house of the (future) present, but it generally doesn't happen. > >Terminals, especially X terminals, are rather like apartments; although >not houses, they do still provide shelter for many people. Some people >would rather live in a tent than rent an apartment, despite the obvious >advantages of an apartment over a tent. > >WebTV terminals are like motel rooms; they work like apartments, but to >an even greater extent. > >What is strangely missing is an everyday ranch operating system. Maybe >BeOS will end up filling that void; it's kind of hard to tell, but it's >a strong possibility in my mind. > >Another strange thing is that the UNIX house owners somehow think that, >by painting their houses modern colors and installing a new entry door, >they can make their house modern and appealing to everyday people. The >real problem, of course, is that the UNIX houses have been extended too >far and too haphazardly beyond their original design goals. > >(Although I picked on UNIX homeowners particularly, other cliques share >some of their delusions. WinNT owners, for instance, frequently notice >how much better their houses are than trailers and tents, and that they >are more efficient than UNIX houses; but they fail to observe the parts >where their own homes fall short. Unlike actual physical houses, those >who inhabit operating systems don't generally have reason to tour other >habitations, and thus assume that their own are nearly ideal.) > >Comments? Agreement/disagreement? > >-- >Andrew Erickson If VMS is a southern plantation house, then RSX is obviously a small weatherboard house with a tin roof and front porch. George (An ICL1900 o/s) could be a 2up 2down English terraced house. The Cray o/s (whatever it was) would be a hotel - excellent in all respects except that all you can afford is a short visit. Phil ###### From: prs@gol.com (Jacqui or (maybe) Pete) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Operating Systems as Houses Message-ID: <38b63f94.35154574@nnrp.gol.com> References: <38b216e0@news.isc.rit.edu> <5xpt4.33465$3b6.160958@ozemail.com.au> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 16 Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 08:42:22 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.216.43.245 X-Complaints-To: abuse@gol.com X-Trace: nnrp.gol.com 951468142 203.216.43.245 (Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:42:22 JST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:42:22 JST Organization: Global Online Japan Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!nntp.kreonet.re.kr!newsfeed.gol.com!203.216.70.8.MISMATCH!nnrp.gol.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:50334 On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:44:12 +1100, "Phil Howell" wrote: And that post would be a small extension added to the far end of an already-rambling farmhouse?