🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6840@internal.Apple.COM> lsr@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein) writes:
>In article <18121@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> jmpiazza@sybil.cs.Buffalo.EDU 
>(Joseph M. Piazza) writes:
>
>>         Well, I think we can all agree that at its beginning the Mac 
>>wasn't designed to multitask.  The Lisa 2? yes.  Amiga?  yes.   Mac?  No.
>
>The part about being designed for multitasking is certainly true.

	Agreed; I was refuting the previous poster's claim (who left no name)
who also was partaking in some Amiga bashing.

>It is interesting, however, that you agree that the Lisa O/S was 
>multitasking, yet it used cooperative multitasking just like the 
>Macintosh.  The only differences were that the Lisa had protected address 
>spaces, and the number of system call which resulted in the system 
>yielding the CPU was larger.

	I agree that Multifinder multitasks.  I also agree that Multifinder
multitasks effectively, though not as effectively as I would like it to,
such as preemptive multitasking used by the the Amiga.  It's the problems
I've had with Multifinder's downloading in the background and formating
disks that irk me the most.  I like that term:  "Cooperative Multitasking."

	I included the Lisa 2 because I started using one in 1985? (time
flies!), so from experience I know that it multitasked.  I know it had some
hardware protection though I wasn't sure of the extent of its nature.

	Did the original Lisa do this also? I'd like to point out that
when I first worked with a Mac I was very confused because it wasn't
behaving like the Lisa at all.  By the way, we used the Lisa running
MacWorks for another year or so before trading it in for a Mac+.  We made
the switch to MacWorks since the only way to use our LaserWriter (no pluses
then) was with Mac software.


>>         The Multifinder is great for task switching as well as running some
>> concurrent tasks but hardly an "unqualified success," ...
>
>It sort of depends on what your definition of success is, but consider 
>that there are more applications multitasking under MultiFinder than under 
>the Amiga O/S.  So MultiFinder is a success in that it provides 
>multitasking without sacrificing the majority of the installed base of 
>applications.

	I agree strongly.  Aside from the multitasking, the Mac has proven
to be an excellent design.  In particular, bringing it to it's current
level of capabilities while maintaining compatibility is a major achievement.

	Our mr. no-name also claimed Multifinder's success as "unqualified."
Successful?  Yes, but, hey, I just "qualified" it.  :->

Flip side,

	joe piazza

--- "Where's my other sock?"  A. Einstein

CS Dept. SUNY at Buffalo 14260

UUCP: ..!{ames,boulder,decvax,rutgers}!sunybcs!jmpiazza		GEnie: jmpiazza
BITNET: jmpiazza@sunybcs.BITNET		Internet: jmpiazza@cs.Buffalo.edu

>Internet: lsr@Apple.com   UUCP: {nsc, sun}!apple!lsr AppleLink: Rosenstein1