🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <7270@microsoft.UUCP> t-stephp@microsoft.UUCP (Stephen Poole) writes:
>In article <27159@srcsip.UUCP> mnkonar@src.honeywell.com (Murat N. Konar) writes:
>>I defy you as a user to sit at both a PM machine and a Mac both running modern
>>software (in the Mac's case MF Friendly, in the PM case a PM app) and tell me 
>>which one is "truly multi-tasking" and which one isn't.and which one isn't.

I agree, with one exception.  When most developers think of true multi-tasking
(or perhaps I should say true multi-programming) I suspect that the notion
of seperate and protected addresss spaces is included.  i.e. the INability of
a user program to bring down the system is centeral.  While USERS will never
know the difference (unless they use buggy programs), developers will, and
the happier develoeprs are the more user programs there will be, and the
more sw available the more users there will be.  So the degree with which a
small number of users (develoeprs) like the multiprogramming model does have
an effect on the bottom line, even though 99.99..% of users don't care.  And
(to lie and add another exception) users don't care how multiprogramming works
but they do care that when they run some buggy programs that once in a while
their system crashes rather then just that one program.  This is also a bottom
line, via marketing, issue since having a program crash instead of the entire
system, clearly points the finger at just that one program rather than casting
doubt on the entire system. (though having a program bring down your Mac is
likely a very rare event, for the general user).
apple!jrg	John R. Galloway, Jr.       contract programmer, San Jose, Ca

These are my views, NOT Apple's, I am a GUEST here, not an employee!!