4 ms·

Umberto Eco - The Holy War: Mac vs. DOS

62 points by pmjoyce 17y ago

pmjoyce 17y ago
Had cause to re-read this 1994 article this morning after a discussion here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1186066 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1186066 - it's an interesting perspective that goes a little beyond the fanboyism often found in discussions on this topic.
julius_geezer 17y ago
I think there was an article those lines in The New Republic probably at least five years before--about 1989 I much shortened my commute and no longer had time to fill by reading magazines. The search at www.tnr.com turns up nothing, though.
- sunchild 17y ago
  Either way, this one was written by Umberto Eco!
rbanffy 17y ago
Would traditional (the ones with X, /etc, /usr/local) Unices be Buddhism in this analogy?
- mtts 17y ago
  If I read it correctly, you can s/DOS/Unix/ and it would still stand, so: no (DOS|Unix) "is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can achieve salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: Far away from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment."
  - riffraff 17y ago
    I'd say it stands better. You have to consider the author is of a literary persuasion, and wrote the article in the '94, unix was something obscure to normal people and popularity of free unixish things were years to come.
    - teilo 17y ago
      What are you talking about? In 1993 even little blond girls knew Unix. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107290/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107290/
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    > It allows free interpretation of scripture Check > demands difficult personal decisions Not really. Haven't given up anything because of a difficult decision > imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user Not at all. Everything is very simple, from the bottom up. > not all can achieve salvation Why not? Every Unix that runs on a regular PC (or a Mac) is a free download. Chances are you can run some flavour of Unix on your watch. Or toaster. > To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself No way. Running most programs is a point-and-click business. On any modern Unix (such as Solaris, Debian or Fedora), installing a programs is a point-and-click, very app-storish thing. Without the DRM part, of course.
    - mtts 17y ago
      > > It allows free interpretation of scripture > Check > > demands difficult personal decisions > Not really. Haven't given up anything because of a difficult decision vim or emacs? KDE or Gnome? decisions, decisions. > > imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user > Not at all. Everything is very simple, from the bottom up. All complex hermeneutics are simple once you're initiated into them. To the outsider, however, Unix is arcane. > > not all can achieve salvation > Why not? Every Unix that runs on a regular PC (or a Mac) is a free download. Chances are you can run some flavour of Unix on your watch. Or toaster. Salvation comes from understanding the system and making it work for you. Merely downloading it is not enough. Unix is user friendly, it's just very picky about who its friends are. > > To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself > No way. Running most programs is a point-and-click business. On any modern Unix (such as Solaris, Debian or Fedora), installing a programs is a point-and-click, very app-storish thing. > Without the DRM part, of course. Configure, Make, Make Install. Remember, this was written in 1994, when point-and-click was still very alien to Unix. (all in good fun, of course)
- jff 17y ago
  No. Just no. Join the campaign to stop mindless Buddhism fanboyism.
proemeth 17y ago
Summary: satirical article to say we don't like flame wars.
aarghh 17y ago
So I wonder where Linux/BSD or open source would fit? Hinduism? Buddhism?
- borism 17y ago
  Linux/BSD are clearly polytheistic, but I'd argue they're not even developed to the hinduism level yet. More like pagan.

62 points by pmjoyce 17y ago

Had cause to re-read this 1994 article this morning after a discussion here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1186066 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1186066 - it's an interesting perspective that goes a little beyond the fanboyism often found in discussions on this topic.

julius_geezer 17y ago

I think there was an article those lines in The New Republic probably at least five years before--about 1989 I much shortened my commute and no longer had time to fill by reading magazines. The search at www.tnr.com turns up nothing, though.

sunchild 17y ago
Either way, this one was written by Umberto Eco!

rbanffy 17y ago

Would traditional (the ones with X, /etc, /usr/local) Unices be Buddhism in this analogy?

mtts 17y ago
If I read it correctly, you can s/DOS/Unix/ and it would still stand, so: no (DOS|Unix) "is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can achieve salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: Far away from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment."
- riffraff 17y ago
  I'd say it stands better. You have to consider the author is of a literary persuasion, and wrote the article in the '94, unix was something obscure to normal people and popularity of free unixish things were years to come.
  - teilo 17y ago
    What are you talking about? In 1993 even little blond girls knew Unix. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107290/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107290/
- rbanffy 17y ago
  > It allows free interpretation of scripture Check > demands difficult personal decisions Not really. Haven't given up anything because of a difficult decision > imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user Not at all. Everything is very simple, from the bottom up. > not all can achieve salvation Why not? Every Unix that runs on a regular PC (or a Mac) is a free download. Chances are you can run some flavour of Unix on your watch. Or toaster. > To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself No way. Running most programs is a point-and-click business. On any modern Unix (such as Solaris, Debian or Fedora), installing a programs is a point-and-click, very app-storish thing. Without the DRM part, of course.
  - mtts 17y ago
    > > It allows free interpretation of scripture > Check > > demands difficult personal decisions > Not really. Haven't given up anything because of a difficult decision vim or emacs? KDE or Gnome? decisions, decisions. > > imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user > Not at all. Everything is very simple, from the bottom up. All complex hermeneutics are simple once you're initiated into them. To the outsider, however, Unix is arcane. > > not all can achieve salvation > Why not? Every Unix that runs on a regular PC (or a Mac) is a free download. Chances are you can run some flavour of Unix on your watch. Or toaster. Salvation comes from understanding the system and making it work for you. Merely downloading it is not enough. Unix is user friendly, it's just very picky about who its friends are. > > To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself > No way. Running most programs is a point-and-click business. On any modern Unix (such as Solaris, Debian or Fedora), installing a programs is a point-and-click, very app-storish thing. > Without the DRM part, of course. Configure, Make, Make Install. Remember, this was written in 1994, when point-and-click was still very alien to Unix. (all in good fun, of course)
jff 17y ago
No. Just no. Join the campaign to stop mindless Buddhism fanboyism.

proemeth 17y ago

Summary: satirical article to say we don't like flame wars.

aarghh 17y ago

So I wonder where Linux/BSD or open source would fit? Hinduism? Buddhism?

borism 17y ago
Linux/BSD are clearly polytheistic, but I'd argue they're not even developed to the hinduism level yet. More like pagan.