Lots of embedded work won't tolerate an OS, sometimes not even an RTOS, which I think was GPs point - nothing specific about Linux.

Or to put it another way, the only reason you would want to move to an OS is to add complexity to what the device is doing. GP is arguing that's a bad trade off.

My thinking from a digital system point of view is that double entry book keeping is the beautiful concept. This concept can easily be expressed using computers but it loses its beauty at each abstraction layer.

The beauty is lost because the user is using a device for double entry book keeping but many other back ground tasks could fail that are not directly related to the task of book keeping.

The user is now faced with needing to understand their goal book keeping plus anything that makes the book keeping device function.

I think a digital aesthetic can be found by creating simple digital devices that are highly specialized but would need something similar to phone to add all the fantastic features that a network device provides.

Imagine how great cars would be with physical buttons but an optional screen to mirror one's phone like device.

Finally I'm actively working on this idea with an 8 unit mixed use building. I'm trying to make it as sophisticated as possible with very simple circuits that don't relay on the internet to function.

The idea is that the industry is overly focused on the internet and completely ignoring all the very simple things that can be done digital devices. I think by establishing a digital aesthetic we can start to say something simple that requires the internet or an operating system is ugly.