🚀 go-pugleaf

>In article <8908021826.AA05333@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, 01659@AECLCR.BITNET (Greg Csullog) writes:
> It drives me nuts to see so many people worrying about multitasking on the
> ST. Jeez, at 8 MHz on a 68000 without a co-processor, I'm having trouble
> getting good performance running one application at a time. 

This sounds a lot like sour grapes.  "I can't have it, so it can't be any
good."  

You want to know how to make a million dollars?  Write a program, or design
a piece of hardware that will make an AT multi-task transparently.  Same
thing if you're using for a Mac.  APPLE and IBM/Compaq/Dell/... would buy
it in an instant.  The industry seems to recognize the value of Multi-
tasking.  Witness OS/2, VM-386, the 386 itself, Multi-finder, UNIX, QNX, etc...
Just think of the money that could've been saved if they had hired Greg 
Csullog as a consultant.  He could've told them that nobody needs or wants
multi-tasking.

At work we use PS/2 Model 70 - A21's with 120 MB disks and 6 MB ram just so 
we can use VM-386 which provides multi-tasking of DOS applications.  Let me 
tell you that it's a real kludge, but it's the best we can do.  I know,
you're talking about home multi-tasking, but you'd really like to go back
to a single-tasking machine at home after using one all day at work?

> Yep the Amiga has multi-tasking; how many people REALLY benefit from it (I
> know this will spark a "look at me" response but I'm talking widespread use
> of multitasking, not isolated examples)?

If you're counting votes, then put me down for one "I REALLY benefit from it".