🚀 go-pugleaf

> According to mail I got from the original poster, "the point is can
> you _read_ [his emphasis] two screens at once, or do you just alternate".
> While looking at debugging output in one window I can perceive when
> the output from the network peer in an adjacent window changes.  This
> is simultaneous use by any reasonable definition - but I take a much
> broader definition.
> 
> The original poster's challenge was to the worth of multiple windows &
> multi-tasking.  Not having these is like trying to do library research
> under a one-book-at-a-time restriction.  If you have more than one
> book open on your desk, you're benefiting from their simultaneous
> *presence*.  Quibblers who say that since you can only *read* one at a
> time, you only *use* one at a time are missing the point.
	So, if what you really want is the ability to have a terminal
session in the background that you can watch out of the corner of your
eye while you edit in another window, multifinder does that quite well.
If you want to have multiple windows open on multiple files, even with
multiple editors, multifinder does that quite well.
	Multifinder is multitasking, by all the requirements you've given.
What multifinder is weak at is things that require preemptive multitasking.
And very little actually requires it, most programs can be easily modified
to voluntarily task switch periodically.  I've even seen c compilers,
pascal compilers, and assemblers which can be used in the background while
other things happen in the foreground under multifinder.
	If you're going to berate things, make sure you've at least
seen them and/or researched them thoroughly, even if you have to live
with a one-book-at-a-time restriction.
> --
> Dick St.Peters                        
> GE Corporate R&D, Schenectady, NY
> stpeters@ge-crd.arpa              
> uunet!steinmetz!stpeters


	David W. Berry
	dwb@well.uucp                   dwb@Delphi
	dwb@apple.com                   973-5168@408.MaBell
Disclaimer: Apple doesn't even know I have an opinion and certainly
	wouldn't want if they did.

Garbage lines to make inews happy.
Garbage lines to make inews happy.
Garbage lines to make inews happy.
Garbage lines to make inews happy.
Garbage lines to make inews happy.
Garbage lines to make inews happy.
Garbage lines to make inews happy.
Garbage lines to make inews happy.