Is anyone aware of an music library/player alternative that follows this philosophy?<p>I'm fairly certain a collection of tools for working with various media would be much better than the iTunes model. It is clearly the worst Apple software since it tries to fit everything into a one click trojan horse for installing on Windows and yet the mainstream Linux alternatives all cargo-cult the basic interface with no obvious signs they understand why all that functionality is bundled into one program.
'Separating interface from engine' clashes with the shortsighted 'text is the universal interface' rule.<p>A great deal of Unix prefers the latter to the former - eg, hunting for a regex to identify some data rather than being provided with something which properly separates the data from the presentation.<p>Object pipelining shells (powershell) and higher level shells (ipython) get this right.
> 17. Rule of Extensibility: Design for the future, because it will be here sooner than you think.<p>Question is "how much" design for the future is necessary today. The basic rule of thumb that I follow is to ensure that necessary means of abstraction have been applied and are in place today so that tomorrow we can extend without reworking all the parts.
Does Unix Philosophy clash with Python Philosophy?<p>Unix: Rule of Diversity: Distrust all claims for “one true way”.<p>Python: There should be one—and preferably only one—obvious way to do it.<p>Well.. I'm comparing an OS with a programming language.
At least the "one tool for one job" part has been pronounced dead by Rob Pike himself.<p><a href="http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/18/1153211" rel="nofollow">http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/18/11532...</a> question 8