>>48
Actually they usually understand both philosophies. If you want more historical details about this, check out the "Worse is Better" article.
They don't directly apply to the Microsoft philosophy since they try to make the code look nice and clear/self-documenting first, which is different from "provide all the possible functionality at once". And even then, I might be wrong, as I'm sure there's many kinds of Lispers out there, some of which might think differently. A Lisper's philosophy is more close to the Lisp Machines/Symbolics(`The Right Thing') one than to Microsoft's.
What is needless functionality for someone, might actually be very useful for another person, and I'm grateful to that. There's a balance somewhere in the middle. The Unix philosophy comes from many ages ago, when things were hard to build and technical limitations. Do you things we would have short 2-3 letter command names these days if typing commands wasn't such a chore in the old days(teletype, no auto-completion, clunky keyboards, and so on) when Multics/Unix was first created?