Many years ago, Apple developed a modern operating system called Pink. It was an object oriented system that one object built on top of one or more objects. For example, a character is an object. The word built on top of characters, the sentence built on top of words. The Pink system was very "pure". Oneday IBM brought that technology and tried to add more development on it. Later on IBM found out that the performance was so slow. Instead of going 10 levels deep to reach something, IBM added some short cuts so something can be reached faster in order to improve the performance. After that modification, the "object built on top of objects" technique was no longer "pure".
When a product such as Pink was in research mode, performance was not important. The moment that it will become a comercial product, the slow performance will be an issue. Sometimme a "pure" system is just not practical.
Quite often we can hear:
- This is not in our system.
- We don't do this.
- It's against our style principle.
- ...
In the ancient time, our TCMA founder might only have to fight against another TCMA guy. Today, a TCMA guy has to fight againt both TCMA guy and non-TCMA guy. Apparently some "additional training" will be needed.
When Judo meets wrestling, Judo has 2 options:
1. Add "single leg" into Judo.
2. Make "single leg" illegal.
Of course if you only spar/wrestle with people in your own style, you can keep your style pure. the moment that you spar/wrestle with another style, the moment that you can't be pure any more.
Does "pure system" have any value in our 21th centry? Your thought?
Reply With Quote