Roy Culley <rgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> begin risky.vbs
> <1wis4iputpmjk.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 21:11:21 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> Microsoft PowerShell isn't Vista-ready, either
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>| As a few other bloggers noted yesterday, Microsoft?s newly
>>>| released PowerShell command-line shell and scripting language
>>>| doesn't currently work with Windows Vista.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=105
>>
>> Duh. That's why it was seperated from the Vista release almost 2
>> years ago. It was stated then that PowerShell (then Monad) would be
>> released out of cycle with Vista.
>>
>> People have such short memories.
>
> Its a CLI shell for goodness sake. It doesn't need to be the be all
> and end all of shells before its initial release. How long did it take
> Korn to write the initial Korn shell? Bourne sh? Joy csh? They could
> do it because the OS made it relatively simple to do so.
>
> In my opinion the problem is that the CLI shell is a fundamental part
> of *nix since the get go. Not so with Windows. Pipes are the glue that
> made shells so powerful IMHO. It was relatively easy to add a GUI to
> *nix. Windows, being designed as a GUI OS has clearly made it
> extremely difficult to provide a CLI interface anywhere near what all
> *nix's offer.
>
> MS realise that a decent CLI shell is necessary. Delivering one is
> obviously a huge task. Where is MS's Korn / Bourne / Joy?
>
> At the end of the day Windows will still be insecure by design. A
> powerful CLI shell would scare me if I ran Windows. Probably best for
> MS if it doesn't see the light of day.
>
The problem is that "monad" isn't really a programming/scripting/command
shell--it's an interface to the .NET framework--and thats ALL it is.
It'd be much more meaningful to compare it to something like the
Python interactive >> interface than to compare it to something like
ksh.
-----yttrx
--
http://www.yttrx.net
|
|
