On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 8:57 PM Tomasz Rola <rtomek(a)ceti.pl> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 09:20:57AM -0400, Dan Cross
wrote:
[...]
Much of Unix's early evolution and thus
architecture and philosophy, came
from addressing a set of problems that people had in a historical context
that, one could argue, aren't that relevant anymore.
I mostly agree with you, but I think certain things should be
expressed more explicitly, even if I do not want to be picky. So, I
see the claim of Unix not being relevant anymore might be interpreted
in two ways, and both are not (quite) true.
I didn't say that Unix is no longer relevant. I said that the problems that
were prominent when Unix was built, and that thus shaped its architecture,
are much _less_ relevant now than they were at the time. They still have
some relevance, but are no longer primary for the vast majority of use
cases Unix is used for. Further, the way people approach problems now has
changed, even if they still generically assume "Unix" as the base they
build on.
- Dan C.