🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <7656@apple.Apple.Com> lsr@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein) writes:
>						       MultiFinder is not
>large (50K) and it works very well.

Well, size is all relative, you know.  50K is more RAM than my
friend's Apple II ever had.  And almost as much as the roms in the
orignal Macs.  But whatever your standards, you can't say 50K is
insignificant. 

>>What's that?  Mac software?  Who cares about Mac software?
>
>Millions of people care.

Sigh.  I forgot to put in the :-).  I know perfectly well that my
argument is an attempt to compare multitasking and MultiFinder in a
vacuum.  The logic is so clean when you ignore other variables.

Reality is messy.  I know that millions of people own Mac software,
and that this is MultiFinder's greatest (only?) advantage.  Of course,
_I_ don't own any Mac software, so why should I care, right? :-) :-)

If all you want to do is compare multitasking and Multifinder _as_
_tools_for_switching_between_programs_, I stand by my argument.  If
you want to introduce extraneous variables (well, I consider them
extraneous) like the software that can run under them, then let me
introduce another extraneous variable:  I can't afford a Mac.
(-: :-) :-) (-: ;-) (^: <-: :-] 8-) \-: B-) (-: :-)  o o
						      ^
						     `-'

>If you simply judge systems on the basis of multitasking, then MultiFinder
>would not offer any advantages.  Most users, however, don't buy computers
>based on operating system features.

Hear hear!  Couldn't have said it better myself!

>-- 
>		 Larry Rosenstein,  Object Specialist
> Apple Computer, Inc.  20525 Mariani Ave, MS 32E  Cupertino, CA 95014
>	    AppleLink:Rosenstein1    domain:lsr@Apple.COM
>		UUCP:{sun,voder,nsc,decwrl}!apple!lsr

Adam