[JSnake]

You two are conflating scientific discoveries with products. Gravity existed before Newton discovered it. He didn't create it. Likewise, it is fine to consider the theory of relativity without going into Einstein's childhood or upbringing or other personal traits of his.

It is, however, absolutely essential to take into account the person behind a product when evaluating a product. You would never write an essay on the film stylings of Stanley Kubrick or Roman Polanski without fully considering their backgrounds and personality quirks. You would certainly never write about a work of classic literature without first taking into account the context of when the book was written, what life experiences the author had, or what inspired the author to write such a book.

Products like TempleOS should be treated the same.

[swordswinger12]

It is not absolutely essential to do anything of the sort - that's one of the central arguments of the post-structuralist movement in critical theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-structuralism#General_prac...

[current_call]

There's a difference between using information about an author to help analyze the thought process behind their work and using information about an author to prejudge their work. I can analyze Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's writing based on his belief in spiritualism, but that isn't the same as labeling Sherlock Holmes blasphemy. You are confounding evaluating purpose and evaluating quality. If I was writing an essay on the origins of TempleOS, then knowing the personal life of the creator helps. If I'm evaluating the quality of the software, then information on Terry is irrelevant.

[IndianAstronaut]

Product? Howabout the transistor. Look up William Shockley. Brilliant but filled with hate.