Eventually, I decided that thinking was not getting me very far and it — Rob Pike

"Where will we be ten years from now? CRT’s will be a thing of the past, multimedia will no longer be a buzzword, pen-based and voice input will be everywhere, and university students will still be editing with emacs. Pens and touchscreens are too low-bandwidth for real interaction; voice will probably also turn out to be inadequate. (Anyway, who would want to work in an environment surrounded by people talking to their computers?) Mice are sure to be with us a while longer, so we should learn how to use them well."

"The major things we saw wrong with Unix when we started talking about what would become Plan 9, back around 1985, all stemmed from the appearance of a network. As a stand-alone system, Unix was pretty good. But when you networked Unix machines together, you got a network of stand-alone systems instead of a seamless, integrated networked system. Instead of one big file system, one user community, one secure setup uniting your network of machines, you had a hodgepodge of workarounds to Unixs fundamental design decision that each machine is self-sufficient."

"One odd detail that I think was vital to how the group functioned was a result of the first Unix being run on a clunky minicomputer with terminals in the machine room. People working on the system congregated in the room - to use the computer, you pretty much had to be there. (This idea didnt seem odd back then; it was a natural evolution of the old hour-at-a-time way of booking machines like the IBM 7090.) The folks liked working that way, so when the machine was moved to a different room from the terminals, even when it was possible to connect from your private office, there was still a "Unix room" with a bunch of terminals where people would congregate, code, design, and just hang out. (The coffee machine was there too.)"

"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing."

"On a related topic, let me say that Im not much of a fan of object-oriented design. Ive seen some beautiful stuff done with OO, and Ive even done some OO stuff myself, but its just one way to approach a problem. For some problems, its an ideal way; for others, its not such a good fit. [...] OO is great for problems where an interface applies naturally to a wide range of types, not so good for managing polymorphism (the machinations to get collections into OO languages are astounding to watch and can be hellish to work with), and remarkably ill-suited for network computing. Thats why I reserve the right to match the language to the problem, and even - often - to coordinate software written in several languages towards solving a single problem. Its that last point - different languages for different subproblems - that sometimes seems lost to the OO crowd."

"Those days are dead and gone and the eulogy was delivered by Perl."