3 ms·

Read the damn text: > While this text singles out Microsoft, other companies are equally evil. For example, porting the diet libc to Solaris would help Sun, no

Read the damn text: > While this text singles out Microsoft, other companies are equally evil. For example, porting the diet libc to Solaris would help Sun, noone else. --- > A professional programmer is OS agnostic While this sound all neutral and reasonable, this is silly on two counts: First, different OSes have different qualities. A professional programmer isn't agnostic, she uses the best tool for the job. Second, licences themselves are not equivalent either: they dictate what one is allowed to do with the software. A professional programmer isn't agnostic, she warns her customer about those issues. If the customer wants to use a proprietary OS anyway, then you have a moral dilemma: help a proprietary vendor, or don't help your customer. Maybe the best choice is to write the software anyway. But don't try and pretend it doesn't suck.

octopus 13y ago
There is no best tool for a job, this is just wishful thinking. The best tool is usually the tool you know and that allows you to finish a particular job in a given amount of time. By agnostic I meant he must not judge an OS based on subjective criteria like it sucks. Otherwise I suppose I'm just old and silly :).
- loup-vaillant 13y ago
  > The best tool is usually the tool you know and that allows you to finish a particular job in a given amount of time. This is a fine criterion. Often a sufficient one, even. > By agnostic I meant he must not judge an OS based on subjective criteria like it sucks. Sure, but the author was advocating not using Windows nor Solaris because of their licences. I assumed your agnosticism meant licences don't matter much. But they do.