What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS 2011

I don't care for it either. I used the nouns because it described the work (thus the thinking habits) of the people who could not understand implications nor technical details of the other kind of thinking). Try explaining a fix to the OS part to a guy who cannot think OS-style. It's one of the reasons monitors had such a huge SPR backlog.

I've been trying ever since people objected here OUT LOUD.

Yes. It very close to a personality style of working but I think this set of nouns just makes things more complicated. JMF always talked about fixing bugs in the "style" of the programmer. This has a lot to do with how that programmer thought logically.

They also seem to be prepared to not argue with reality and just go ahead and fix whatever seemed broke. I found compiler-thinking types trying to argue about "what should be". There were times when I just wanted to shake them until their teeth rattled. :-)

The closest I've come to finding somebody who described this stuff well was when I read Lynn's recommendation about Boyd.

Oh, definitely. Network work required a different way of thinking. I never quite clbuttified the work-style.

Note that I don't think that I understand Boyd's OODA loop well enough.

Yes, they seemed to have done so.

I usually saw this as "step thinking". One cannot do the next thing until the first is done. IOW, step 1, step 2, step 3, ...step n. And the order of steps cannot be mixed up. Compiler devlopers had to do this. Note that I am not talking about people who use compilers; I am talking about the people who developed the compilers that other people used.

Yes. This thinking style seems to be able to switch hats in mid paragraph (but I'm sure if they can switch in mid- sentence). I don't think they do because it messes up database approaches. I did not get to study how these people thought, because DEC didn't have many. Like I thought I said in another post, the PDP-10 had one guy who could do it well.

hypotheses. People have to loosen the Scientific Method girdle when they get out of work once a while.

Yes. You notice that this cannot deal with random humans typing at TTYs. They are more strict about what users should be allowed to type. This is why timesharing OSes were so powerful. The OS allowed all kinds of thinking styles to play.

Listen in on a design session where you have both types and watch how they cannot communicate. Even if there is a translator attending the meeting, notice the words he has to use to include both types. It makes a mess.

And, a completely alien style of thinking are those LISPers. I never got to know enough to even be able to talk about it.

I'll also take this posttime to emphasize that there is no such thing as only two styles and I have had no intention of stating such a thing. I talk about two because those were the two that I watched over the years.

BAH