[HN Gopher] The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf] ___________________________________________________________________ The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf] Author : bobsmith432 Score : 94 points Date : 2023-11-29 20:20 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (web.mit.edu) (TXT) w3m dump (web.mit.edu) | bioneuralnet wrote: | Always a good read, but it needs an update with modern cultural | references. Even I, nearly middle aged, have very little idea | what it means to compare X.org to Iran-Contra and Regan's | spending habits. | tyingq wrote: | Well, and maybe some talk about Wayland. | civilitty wrote: | What's the right modern analogy for that transition? | | Fukushima? | tyingq wrote: | The F-35 fighter jet program maybe. | ikidd wrote: | Ugh. I do... | sillywalk wrote: | Just for you - SNL Reagan the "Mastermind" | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5wfPlgKFh8 | postmodest wrote: | I still have the barf-bag. | | Also jwz is still a salty old man. | justsomehnguy wrote: | The first time I leraned about this book I giggled about the | title. But in the modern world of the conformity and a learned | helplessness it's a quiet reminder what you can't do better if | nobody says you unpleasant things. | estebank wrote: | > But in the modern world of the conformity and a learned | helplessness it's a quiet reminder what you can't do better if | nobody says you unpleasant things. | | I fight a lot against learned helplessness, trying to get | people to actually report bugs, to complain about papercuts | they encounter in tools that I can change. But because people | are used to having their complaints fall on deaf ears, they | don't, so I seek them out in places like here and some time | back, Twitter. But that also brings up a dredge of non- | constructive unactionable complaints that end up doing nothing | more than make me shake my head and close the tab. There are | ways of complaining without being nasty to the people doing the | work. Being a dick is not a personality type. | zokier wrote: | > But in the modern world of the conformity and a learned | helplessness it's a quiet reminder what you can't do better if | nobody says you unpleasant things. | | But UNIX continues to dominate and have problems, so I don't | see Unix-Haters Handbook being very good example of saying | unpleasant things making anything better; its more of a | counter-example, demonstrating how annoying rants get easily | ignored | spit2wind wrote: | It turns out passivity to shock is the default. _Learned_ | helplessness doesn 't exist. It's less about saying unpleasant | things and more about assisting others towards control. Of | course, less is more, right :) | | https://ppc.sas.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/learnedhelples... | tedunangst wrote: | Nothing about unix got better as a response to this book. | tyingq wrote: | The printed one included a "Unix Barf Bag" glued to the back | cover. | | https://imgur.com/a/0fGOdP7 | dcminter wrote: | I'd forgotten that! It was a nice touch. | dcminter wrote: | I remember borrowing this from a friend a couple of years after | that Finnish chap created a *nix that I could run on my lowly 386 | machine. | | If you are a unix lover (as I am), then it's worth it at the very | least for the anti-foreword by Dennis Ritchie. | bee_rider wrote: | Ritchie tip-toed right up to the line between staying tongue- | in-cheek and ripping them to shreds. It was quite impressive | IMO. | kagevf wrote: | Felt like the hate was mutual. | cf100clunk wrote: | This item has a fairly even periodicity of previous submissions | here at HN. I'm not quibbling about resubmissions, just wondering | what is the motivation re: this particular piece? EDIT: Replies | and not downvotes would be appreciated. | dcminter wrote: | Does it need one? There's a longish list of perennials. Mostly | what they have in common is that they're interesting to first- | timers and pithy enough to be worth a re-read for the rest of | us. Someone comes across it for the first time, or are reminded | of it, and bob's your uncle it pops up again as a submission. | dang wrote: | Yup that's right - reposts are fine after a year or so | (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html), and it's good | for newer cohorts of users to get access to the perennials: | | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que. | .. | UncleSlacky wrote: | Possibly because of this mention in the comments of a recent El | Reg article about Wayland: | | https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2023/11/29/rhel_10_... | ReleaseCandidat wrote: | It's like the frequently questioned answers of C++: always a | good read. https://yosefk.com/c++fqa/ | rdhatt wrote: | A lot of people here put Unix on a pedestal, so finding a | published book that so explicitly hates Unix is quite novel. | Furthermore, the criticism doesn't come from the typical | demographic, Microsoft Windows users. | j2kun wrote: | To what extent have the problems in the book been addressed since | 1994? | cf100clunk wrote: | Could you be more specific? | justin66 wrote: | To what extent have the problems in _The Unix-Haters | Handbook_ been addressed since 1994? | bee_rider wrote: | Maybe they wanted to know which month you were taking | about. | tyingq wrote: | The "plethora of incomplete, incompatible shells" has narrowed | down a fair amount if you only include ones in wide use. | | And "The push for a unified Unix" sort of happened, we're down | to 2 or 3 that get any broad attention. | AnimalMuppet wrote: | 2 or 3? Linux, and what are the other 1 or 2? | tyingq wrote: | MacOS, and various might argue Minix (prevalence via Intel | Management Engine), or FreeBSD, etc. | mongol wrote: | OSX I guess qualifies | ikidd wrote: | Well, if we're talking about the problem of it still existing, | that one has almost been solved. | GeorgeTirebiter wrote: | I was thinking the same thing; so many of their original | complaints have been addressed. | | However, one has not: unix _still_ uses the NJ-style (vs the | MIT style), which is, if you can 't figure out how to handle an | error -- then don't. Also, put the burden on the programmer. | Lovely stuff like that, which is core to the "unix philosophy". | mwcremer wrote: | To be fair, the web as a whole is like that these days, in | that HTTP explicitly includes the _user_ as part of the error | handling (404, 500, 503). How many times have you hit | "Reload" today? | fanf2 wrote: | That was much less true by the end of the 1990s. Partly due | to things like BSD's improved signal handling. And partly due | to the userland code quality improvements from the BSD and | GNU rewrites. | | Shell scripting is still a nightmare for error handling, but | by the end of the 1990s there were better scripting languages | available to use when that matters. | bee_rider wrote: | There are no longer good operating systems to compare Unix- | clones against, so those of us who've grown up in this | millennium don't even see the problems. | tech_ken wrote: | X11 continues to be A Thing, although the transition to Wayland | is somewhat underway | tedunangst wrote: | > Even if you can get an X program to compile, there's no | guarantee it'll work with your server. If an application | requires an X extension that your server doesn't provide, | then it fails. | | Thankfully Wayland fixed this by locking down the protocol | and banning extensions. | arp242 wrote: | Pretty much all of them, insofar they were even valid concerns | to begin with because many are not, or are at least hugely | simplified, and a number of others have nothing to do with | "Unix" in the first place. | | The entire book is basically "let's compare the worst of 10 | Unix systems to the best of 10 other systems, and then come to | the conclusion all of Unix sucks and all the others are | brilliant". Well, anything "sucks" in that way. And that is | assuming that "best of 10 other systems" is accurate and not | hugely biased and viewed with rose-coloured glasses. | | I think this sentence probably sums up the book quite nicely: | | > Will journaling become prevalent in the Unix world at large? | Probably not. After all, it's non-standard. | | Which probably tells you all you need to know about the | mentality of the authors. Nothing in any standard prevented | anyone from journaling. It's just FUD. | | The first journaling filesystem was introduced in 1990, in AIX, | and then in 1991 in HP-UX. Both are Unix. Windows followed in | 1993, Apple in 1998. This book is from 1994. This was more or | less cutting-edge(-ish) stuff back then. | | "Storing files" reliably has always been hard, on any system. | "Unix can lose files" - well, yeah, just like any other system | mate. Unix lead the way on improving that with journaling, and | the book even acknowledges that in the paragraph before the one | I quoted, and it's still whinging and whining and spreading | bullshit FUD. | | I'm not saying Unix is perfect today and I'm sure as hell not | saying Unix anno 1994 was perfect. but a careful thoughtful | criticism this book is not. The best part is Dennis Ritchie's | "anti-foreword". | | A book refuting all the bullshit in this book, even from a 1994 | perspective, would probably be longer than this book. It's a | classic case of bullshit asymmetry where flinging some nonsense | in to the world takes almost no effort at all, but refuting it | takes a lot more effort. | postmodest wrote: | Unix has gotten better while everything else got worse. | | We no longer have dinosaurs like LISP-M or TOPS-10 for the | Unix-haters to get rose-colored nostalgia for. | | And Windows NT proved how terrible the alternative could be. | The NT api and Powershell is basically the "Monkey's-Paw" | version of what the authors wanted. Be careful what you wish | for. | LAC-Tech wrote: | It's so strange that as far back as the 80s a lot of the | criticism of unix is that it wasn't "graphical". Meanwhile in the | year 2023 AD I've moved more and more of my workflow to the | terminal to escape the rapidly changing, distracting, and | visually bloated GUI landscape. | quickthrower2 wrote: | If it is in the terminal (command line to be specific since GUI | is possible inside a terminal too) then it is already ready for | automation, containerisation, running on a server. | pjmlp wrote: | As someone that was alive during those UNIX days, I really | don't get the appeal to live in the past. | LAC-Tech wrote: | I just gave you multiple reasons. | ploum wrote: | I don't believe it is "the past" which is appealing. | | We live in a very graphical society, with (moving) pictures | everywhere, all the time. But to "think", you need words. As | Neal Stephenson put it in "In the beginning was the command | line", Words are the only technology available to encode | thoughts. While images and sounds convey more emotions. It's | not a coincidence that we are here exchanging words. | | Command-line, is a way to exchange words with a computer. It | is way more precise, more efficient. But it takes learning | and thinking. It's harder the same way it is harder to read a | book than to watch a movie. Especially if you never learned | to read in the first place which, for the command-line, is | approximately everyone but a few geeks. | | If your goal is to "think" precisely and convey this thinking | into something tangible on a computer, then you probably want | the command line. But, as it needs a lot of learning, you | don't want it for temporary job. You don't learn to read | because you want to read Harry Potter. You learn to read | because you want to spend your life reading books. | | In "UNIX As Litterature", Scoville argued that UNIX is done | by literary people for literary people. People which have a | strong "book" culture. People who probably enjoy books more | than the movies because "there's a lot more, it's more | subtle, I can imagine it like I want". | | Those people, (disclaimer: I count myself in those) may even | have too much "graphics" in their daily lives. Too many | pictures. Billboards, movies, ads, colored and graphical | t-shirts everywhere, branding. | | Retreating to the command-line feels good, calm, zen. (see | Stephenson book again). | | But, I admit, those people are a minority. Graphical | interfaces have the advantage of being intuitive. Intuitive | literally means "you don't need to think" (that's what | intuition is). You click randomly and, by trial and error, | you learn some arbitrary rules that the designers decided to | use. (when I was teaching basic Windows XP computer use to | elders, I once got a very simple question: "how do I know if | I need to click once or double click?". I never could answer | that. There are no real rule. You learn it and never think | about it afterward). | | So the GUI is really about removing the thinking from the | process. Which is good when you don't care about the process | or when you are not really sure what you want. Or when you | want something to be quickly done once and for all. | | Command-line forces you to clarify your thoughts all the | time. It is hard. It is energy consuming. But this forces you | to take real decisions. | arp242 wrote: | Unix was graphical. It even had a graphical control panel long | before Windows in /usr/bin/vi. | JohnMakin wrote: | I haven't worked in a GUI in 5 years | bradford wrote: | As someone who picked up C++ in the late 90s, the discussion on | the language resonates with me: | | "Other books can tell you how using any of dozens of object- | oriented languages can make programmers more productive, make | code more robust, and reduce maintenance costs. Don't expect to | see any of these advantages in C++..." | | "That's because C++ misses the point of what being object- | oriented was all about. Instead of simplifying things, C++ sets a | new world record for complexity. Like Unix, C++ was never | designed, it mutated as one goofy mistake after another became | obvious. It's just one big mess of afterthoughts. There is no | grammar specifying the language (something practically all other | languages have), so you can't even tell when a given line of code | is legitimate or not." | pjmlp wrote: | C++ was born into UNIX, on the same corridor as UNIX and C | folks were, hence why its adoption grew alongside UNIX and C. | | I suggest reading Design and Evolution of C++. | mianos wrote: | I use C++ and Python every day. There are ways to make C++ | pretty tidy but it is always some tidy stuff in a few files | with the rest being a working, but, steaming pile of crap. I | always laugh when people seem to jump on a code base and use a | few new features. | | That said, if, say my 15 year old crappy car has a hand built | twin turbo, hand built multiple times, v8, that revs to 8500 | with a custom built diff and suspension. Given a choice of one | of those fancy new, clean lined, reliable cars and mine, I know | which one I would take to out if I wanted to have fun and go | fast. | | Now relate this to go, rust and C++. | idkdotcom wrote: | Say what you will, but I started my professional career with | computers back in 1998 doing professional services for HP and its | variant of UNIX, HP-UX, and I haven't looked back. As I kid I had | played around with a number of personal computers that ran either | MS-DOS, Windows or proprietary OS'es (such as the AmigaDOS). | | To this day, I consider UNIX-Like systems to be a delight. Even | Apple had to move to UNIX. | | Big Tech would not exist without Linux (aka UNIX). | dang wrote: | Related. Others? | | _The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31417690 - May 2022 (86 | comments) | | _The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19416485 - March 2019 (157 | comments) | | _The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994)_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17614992 - July 2018 (1 | comment) | | _The Unix-HATERS Handbook [pdf]_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15403642 - Oct 2017 (2 | comments) | | _The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13781815 - March 2017 (307 | comments) | | _The Unix-Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9976694 - July 2015 (5 | comments) | | _The Unix Haters Handbook (1994) [pdf]_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7726115 - May 2014 (50 | comments) | | _Anti-foreword to the Unix haters handbook by dmr_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3106271 - Oct 2011 (31 | comments) | | _The Unix Haters Handbook_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1272975 - April 2010 (28 | comments) | | _The Unix Hater's Handbook, Reconsidered_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=319773 - Sept 2008 (5 | comments) | anotheraccount9 wrote: | I can't wait for an AI/OS to simply ask it what I need to do. | Merrill wrote: | Fairly early, Bell Labs executives decided to mandate that Bell | Labs organizations developing software for the Bell System use | Unix, which was from the research organization. | | This led to many inventive rationales as to why a non-DEC | computer and a non-Unix OS where really essential for specific | applications. Resistance lasted for some time, but was eventually | futile. | wbadart wrote: | I knew of Don Norman from reading The Design of Everyday Things a | few years ago; funny to see his name pop up here! | | Searching around to make sure it's the same Norman, I came to | find out that he wrote an article, _The truth about Unix: The | user interface is horrid_ , 7 years before DoET came out (which | is confirmed in the Forward)! Had no idea he was on this scene. | eigenhombre wrote: | The "Illustrations" credit on the cover is covered up by the | "Programmers Press" but it looks like it is John Klossner. The | hand-drawn illustrations are great, definitely one of my favorite | aspects of the book. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-11-29 23:00 UTC)