🚀 go-pugleaf

In alt.msdos.programmer article <3sa815$11r@nnrp2.primenet.com>,
brahman@Primenet.Com (Carl Hayter) wrote:
> In article <GERHARD.GRUBER.95Jun21143102@atusel16.aut.alcatel.at>,
> Gerhard Gruber <Gerhard.Gruber@aut.alcatel.at> wrote:
> :In article <3s90rc$obs@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk> tjrc1@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk (Tim Cutts (Zoology)) writes:
> :
> :>From: tjrc1@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk (Tim Cutts (Zoology))
> :>Date: 21 Jun 1995 11:46:52 GMT
> :>Organization: U. of Cambridge, England
> :
> :>Well, it seems that a good OS that's written in C does seem to take
> :>this sort of memory.  Consider the equivalent for Linux:
> :>Linux+XFree86 requires 8Mb to be at all useable.  Yes it works in 4,
> :>but it's painful.  As soon as you run a sizeable client 16Mb is more
> :>practical.  I don't think Linux has featuritis, although many would
> :>say that X is an absolute monstrosity.
> :
> :Then I wonder how it is possible that AmigaOS fits in 512KB (or 1MB)? And don't
> :tell me that it's all the "special chips". I think even adding VM
> :capabilites to it (provided the processor supports it) wouldn't amount
> :to that size.
> 
> 
> Partially because AmigaOS (at least the exec kernel) is in ROM, the filesystem
> and OS are single-user, the GUI while nice is nowhere near as robust as X.
> 
> Were AmigaOS to match any unix/X combo feature for feature I have the
> nagging suspicion that it too would take 8M+ to be comfortable.
> 
> It does run circles around DOS/Windoze though. 
> 
> brahman,
> I liked my Amiga, I love my linux.

Actually, there are only two reasons why *IX uses more memory than
workbench for the Amiga.  As brahman noted, Amiga O/S is single user,
though multi-tasking, and can thus take some liberties with resource
useage, whereas *IX is multi-tasking and multi-user, and consumes resources
to achieve that.  The other reason is that Amiga O/S was written for a
specific platform, with known characteristics.  *IX was written to run on
any platform, and a substantial amount of resources are consumed to provide
the layer that makes the hardware transparent.

You can get UNIX for the amiga, and it is not appreciably smaller than UNIX
for any other machine.  In terms of sheer transportability, UNIX has them
all beat, and I agree with brahman - AMIGA O/S kicks butt on any
DOS/WINDOZE based system (I still use AMIGADOS 1.3 on a 3Mb RAM, 145MB disk
system with a 68000, and can run uncountable apps, but my DOS6.2/WFW3.11
16Mb RAM 1.6GB disk Pentium 90 at work, I'm lucky if I can run 3 apps at
the same time.), but for sheer bliss, get *IX.

+----- Dave Wright | wrightd@merlin.magic.mb.ca -------------------+
| You can lead a horse to water, but if you can get it to float on |
| it's back, you've done something.   - author unknown             |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+