4 ms·
> his then-belief that MIT was going to succeed doing its variant of the same thing (Multics -- insert notes of irony) And yet Multics did in fact succeed, del
by jff 9y ago
> his then-belief that MIT was going to succeed doing its variant of the same thing (Multics -- insert notes of irony)
And yet Multics did in fact succeed, delivering an operating system that was used throughout the US, Canada, and Europe, with the final installation shut down in 2000. Unix history has, I believe, tended to exaggerate the early challenges to the extent where people now simply believe "Multics was a failure".
- drostie 9y agoI mean, I agree, it's not a total failure--but I'm sure people in this community can appreciate the feeling of "dammit I failed at this stupid problem, these other people are kicking ass at it and I just suck" when hindsight says "actually, that was a really hard problem!" It's well worth remembering that one-in-three is a really good batting average and one-in-four is MLB average. Actually that's why I like baseball as a sport in general; it's not usually as exciting as other sports but when you play it and you swing and the ump calls "STRIKE ONE," you have to swallow any disappointment and pick up that bat and get ready again: because that next pitch is coming, a new opportunity.
- PhasmaFelis 9y agoAnd downplayed Unix's own early issues--see the 1994 Unix-Hater's Handbook. http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/preface.html http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/preface.html