🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3609@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> chekmate@athena.mit.edu (Adam Kao) writes:
>David admits there are areas where Multifinder is less than
>multitasking.  I know of no areas where multitasking is less
>convenient than Multifinder.
	Sigh, misquoted again.  And out of context even.  What
I said was that MultiFinder still had some known areas where it
could be improved.  Not that it was less than multitasking.  As
a matter of fact it is fully and completely multitasking, non-
premptive, but multitasking all the same.  Especially when one
considers that all macintosh programs should be calling GetNextEvent
periodically to interact with the user anyway, and task switching
is done there.
	If one get's right down to it, UNIX, NeWS, SunView,
X, A/UX, the Toolbox and every operating system has a lot of
room for improvement.  In the case of "multitasking" we'll
assume you mean either NeWS, SunView, or X (any version you
choose)  MultiFinder has one major advantage, that isn't important
to a lot of folks reading comp.sys.mac but is important to
the vast majority of the world.  It presents a single, easily
learned, consistent interface across all applications.  That's
something that SunView and X can't provide and NeWS has yet to
prove that it will provide.
>
>People keep saying Multifinder can do what multitasking does.  But
>there is at least one thing multitasking has over Multifinder:
>generality and simplicity (was that two?  Or really one?  never mind).
>What does Multifinder have over multitasking?  In other words:
>---> WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO USE MULTIFINDER??? <---
	Huh?  Generality I'll grant you simply because the programmer
has to go to a little more effort.  As far as most users are concerned
there is no difference between the multitasking present on your unix
box with a windowing system and multitasking as presented by MultiFinder.
	A comparison of simplicity between multitasking and MultiFinder
is relatively useless because multitasking is an operating system concept
featured within MultiFinder.  To compare apples with apples, let's compare
windowing systems.  All other things equal, which they basically are,
consistency makes the Macintosh interface and MultiFinder simpler to
learn and use than X, NeWS, or SunView.
>
>What's that?  Mac software?  Who cares about Mac software?
>
>Adam
>
>disclaimer:  MIT lets me use their equipment because I pay them
>$12,500 a year.
	Well, Adam, eventually you'll make it out into the real world
and discover that there are several million people who want a system
that's easy to use, presents a consistent user interface and does
what Mac software does and Unix doesn't.  Unix is wonderful for
universities, some businesses and maybe even workstations, but it's
just too big and too complex for 95% of the worlds population.

	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.