4 ms·

> Just about everything that set out to be big and professional, failed. GNU HURD. Microsoft OS/2. Apple Copland. IBM Workplace OS. Apple and IBM's Taligent. Wh

by uticus 3y ago

> Just about everything that set out to be big and professional, failed. GNU HURD. Microsoft OS/2. Apple Copland. IBM Workplace OS. Apple and IBM's Taligent. Whereas CP/M and DOS and Windows, even Unix itself, all started out as fun little proof-of-concept things that barely did anything, but were fun to play around with. > My core proposal is to cut Oberon down into a monolithic, net-bootable binary, and run Squeak on top of it. For drivers and networking and so on, there's a solid, mature, fast, low-level language with a choice of toolchains. But the user-facing environment is the much higher-level Smalltalk-based Squeak GUI – for apps and experimenting and learning. Decades after they split, we reunite Smalltalk and the tiny efficient OS that it inspired. I love the vibe and the nostalgia. But there's a lot going against anything like this taking off in today's real world. For one, personal computing devices are phones, not PCs. Secondly, in computing we're past the stage of innovation and well into the stage of... well, consolidation or something. I mean, I love the ideas behind this but if there were a business doing these things I wouldn't invest a cent in it, there's no market for it.

lproven 3y ago
[Article author here] > I love the vibe and the nostalgia. Good! Glad to hear that. > But there's a lot going against anything like this taking off in today's real world. The thing is this: I've been around this business for a long time. People said similar things in the 1980s, and in the 1990s, and in the noughties... Some reckoned Y2K was the last chance to eliminate the old cruft and replace it. > For one, personal computing devices are phones, not PCs. 1. By design they're closed and not user-programmable. 2. There are a handful of exceptions, like the PinePhone, the FairPhone, and things. 3. Phone and tablet and PC tech is converging. > Secondly, in computing we're past the stage of innovation and well into the stage of... well, consolidation or something. I am aware. The thing is, this is not the first time. It's cyclical, like fashion. > I mean, I love the ideas behind this but if there were a business doing these things I wouldn't invest a cent in it, there's no market for it. That is precisely why I stress the importance of doing it just for fun. There's no: « 2. ??? 3. Profit! » Here. There may one day be 42. Profit!

by uticus 3y ago

lproven 3y ago

[Article author here] > I love the vibe and the nostalgia. Good! Glad to hear that. > But there's a lot going against anything like this taking off in today's real world. The thing is this: I've been around this business for a long time. People said similar things in the 1980s, and in the 1990s, and in the noughties... Some reckoned Y2K was the last chance to eliminate the old cruft and replace it. > For one, personal computing devices are phones, not PCs. 1. By design they're closed and not user-programmable. 2. There are a handful of exceptions, like the PinePhone, the FairPhone, and things. 3. Phone and tablet and PC tech is converging. > Secondly, in computing we're past the stage of innovation and well into the stage of... well, consolidation or something. I am aware. The thing is, this is not the first time. It's cyclical, like fashion. > I mean, I love the ideas behind this but if there were a business doing these things I wouldn't invest a cent in it, there's no market for it. That is precisely why I stress the importance of doing it just for fun. There's no: « 2. ??? 3. Profit! » Here. There may one day be 42. Profit!