IBM 610 workstation computer 3461

Yea, I shouldn't have written it that way; I meant the only way to do this well. The way to establish an efficiently-run anything is to deal with small problems, immediately at the place and time they happen. To not do this ensures that every small problem becomes a crisis of major proportion. Now males like this because they are built to work under adrenalin rushes. However, this burns out steady production work and eventually stops the production all together. This is true for computing systems, human beings and anything else that has a goal of some progress.

And any set threory would organize as much as possible as superimposed sets (I think that is the correct term).

And it is completely outside of this discussion. We are talking about contingency planning without impacting the daily production schedules. Any talk about Gates' stuff is smoke because their goal is the exact opposite--block as much production as possible.

A couple. Just because the OS existed doesn't mean that the OS was available for development in response to today's needs. In fact, it was the opposite situtation until ATT dumped this rights business. Even now the Unix OS biz is a mess. The mess is getting cleared up slowly but it's still a big mess. I'm still no sure that the Linux model will work long-term.

And I'm talking about having n numbers of people who can just set down and to typeity-type and hand over a set of bits that any system owner can use to help do his-her work. Unix is not in this state of OS eveolution...yet.

Exactly. And all of them.

That's my point. Unix has not evolved to the point where it can be a choice with a little impact as the choice of the color or your next new automobile.

BAH