Priorities

[Anders Petersson]

>From: Pieter Dumon <Pieter.Dumon@rug.ac.be> (in unios@onelist.com)
>> From: Tril <dem@tunes.org>
>> 
>> Pat's most recent list was:
>> 
>> 1) Flexible
>> 2) Stable/Reliable
>> 3) Secure
>> 4) Fast
>> 5) User Friendly
>> 
>> Anders wrote:
>> > Performance is the biggest hassle. I guess some effort has to be put
>> > into this.
>> 
>> I think 4 and 5 should be switched.  The user (and programmer) is more
>> important than speed of the system. 

5 is easier to improve afterwards than 4. For us, 4 is more important than 5.

>This depends on  the kind of user. Each user has its own priorities. I'd
>prefer speed over user-friendly. (Allthough my definition of user-friendly 
>is rather extreme. I think even Unix is user-friendly , certainly with X.)
>
>> > What about 'Stable' on 1 ??
>> Pat replied:
>> > I agree that stability is very important, but I don't know
>> > how we would focus on stability in the initial design.
>> 
>
>Look, let's just look to QNX as teh best example: It's stable AND most
>flexible AND fast AND real-time AND secure AND user-friendly all at one
>time, without prioritizing one above the other. It's used as the computer
>system in the Space Shuttle,it's used by Banksys here in Belgium, the firm
>that organizes VISA and bank cards for Belgium. So it's GOOD, and it has
>all these features. 

Ok. Let's lay this discussion aside for a while, convinced that all these
goals can be achieved.

binEng