Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 12:39:33 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <v9v7d4$2r6q2$1@dont-email.me>
References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <20240408075547.000061e8@gmail.com>
 <g52cnWOOwoz_son7nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <uvbe3m$2cun7$1@dont-email.me> <uvbfii$3mom0$1@news.xmission.com>
 <20240412094809.811@kylheku.com> <87il0mm94y.fsf@tudado.org>
 <way-20240413091747@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <87il0lldf8.fsf@tudado.org>
 <choices-20240413123957@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <v9lm2k$12qhv$1@dont-email.me> <v9m4gd$14scu$1@dont-email.me>
 <20240815182717.189@kylheku.com> <v9npls$1fjus$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9posc$1rpdj$1@dont-email.me> <v9pvoo$1sn55$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9r60h$2289h$2@dont-email.me> <v9sa91$2afht$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9tv8o$2iahp$1@dont-email.me> <v9uso3$2pdrg$2@dont-email.me>
 <v9v0e0$2q822$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 12:39:33 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7f0f8cffd5f8b7dd36dcbeaaba75ce11";
	logging-data="2988866"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19tLZu3HSF34clvp0TDjEoReG3podVI/gY="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aJ6gCx9KYtlVlCpPOsp2KaLiamE=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v9v0e0$2q822$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5465

On 2024-08-19 10:40, David Brown wrote:
> On 19/08/2024 09:37, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:

>> Both OSes contributed to the Dark Ages of computing. The reasons are 
>> not technical, because both were worst on the market. 
> 
> What sort of time-frame are you thinking of here, what were the 
> alternatives that you think were "better", what markets or uses are you 
> considering, and in what way were other OS's "better" ?
> 
> There's no doubt that non-technical issues have had a big influence on 
> which OS's or types of OS have succeeded, but you seem to have something 
> specific in mind.

I think the main reason is that we do not pay the actual costs of 
software developing. OS, compiler require huge investments. Vendors 
never passed these to the end users funding developing from other 
sources. That effectively killed the market. Free software only 
aggravated the situation. In effect it is akin to the socialist 
production method which always kills quality.

> Windows has locks on files, which are a different thing.  While I can 
> understand the point of them, they can be a real inconvenience (try 
> deleting a directory tree when a file from that tree is in use).

Oh, yes! I understand why I should not remove a locked file, but I still 
enjoy Linux's ability to remove anything an be it all damned!

The usual case is when Windows locks some file on the Linux Samba server 
share for some mysterious reason. It is a sheer fun to log into the 
server do "rm -rf" on the file and then go back to Windows: "eat that!"

>> Under Linux you must log in as the root and remove the stray file lock 
>> manually. It happens in UNIX administration all the time.
> 
> As someone who has administrated Linux servers for decades, and used it 
> as my desktop OS on many machines, I am not sure I can ever remember 
> removing a stray lock file.  Certainly needing to do so "all the time" 
> is a very wild exaggeration.  Linux, like all systems, undoubtedly has 
> its flaws and weaknesses, but this is not one of them IME.

In main case it is packet manager. I am too lazy to find how to turn off 
automatic update checks. So when I try to run apt or dnf I have to kill 
the lock.

> Times change.  Needs and uses change.  Hardware changes.
> 
> Keeping things separate and modular has advantages in scalability, 
> security and stability.  Keeping things monolithic has advantages in 
> efficiency (speed and memory) and consistency.  There is no "right" answer.

Yes. E.g. in automotive you still need the system booted right after you 
turned the key.

Initially an ability to trim the system and sometimes to patch a driver 
was a huge advantage Linux had over Windows NT.

>> On the other hand you still cannot have decent gaming under Linux.
> 
> I do almost all my gaming under Linux.  Some games do work better under 
> Windows, but that is primarily because most games developers target 
> Windows as their main platform.  It may also be because Linux systems 
> are more varied.

"You are in an open field on the west side of a white house with a 
boarded front door." That sort of games? (:-))

>>> And single drive letters?
>>
>> They are dozens characters long actually, if you mean the device names.
> 
> I thought by "drive letters", he meant "drive letters" - "c:", "d:", etc.

The official file name of "C:" would be some messy string with lots of 
backslashes. C: is a "DOS name." There are API to convert DOS names into 
proper names. It is a mess. All Windows API is a mess.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de