🚀 go-pugleaf

dcorn@metronet.com (David Corn) wrote:
>Mike Noreen <ev-michael@mail.nrm.se> wrote:

>>Well, technically it is still more advanced than either Copland 
>>or Win95, in that it is fully 32-bit, fully preemptively 
>>multitasking, fully modular, fully OO, realtime and a lot of 

>Fully OO?  I don't think so.  Can you define what you mean by this?

I am ofcourse referring to BOOPSI, which you should be 
acquainted with.

>>other stuff that other operating systems are still struggling 
>>to achieve. And it did really handle removable media just the 
>>way that guy said - both System7 and Windows have abysmal 
>>handling of removable media, for no good reason other than 
>>backwards compatibility.

>Really?  I haven't had any problems with my Zip drive, nor with floppy
>drives.  What are you talking about here?

I am talking about, for instance, not having DMA, which caused 
the GUI to lock up. The solution to this was the diskcache, and 
therefore System7 is the only OS which caches reads AND WRITES 
to floppy. Since caching writes to a removable media means that 
the OS has no way of telling whether data written to the media 
has been saved or is still in the cache, the soft-eject of the 
Macs were born. Not as a design feature, but as a design 
necessity.
Then there's the problem with how floppies are handled from a 
desktop view. The Mac handles this fairly well (remember the 
cache?), but even Win95 is brought to it's knees as soon as you 
start formatting/copying to a floppy.

>You miss one key little point - those other OSs have -software-,
>something the Amiga sorely lacks.

Running Win95, and having run System7.5, I can only say 'not 
really'. It lacks big name apps - not software. There are 
counterparts to any software available on any other platform, 
but under different names. Its gfx handling and animation 
packages are still on par with the best in the biz, and if one 
starts looking at shareware, then it is clearly in the lead.

MVH: Mike Noreen