🚀 go-pugleaf

don winsby wrote:

> 
> so let me get this straight.  just divy up the available resources by
> the number of processes and execute in parallel?  if you want parallel
> then dont you need two processors?  and if you are going to divy up,
> what happens to the really important tasks that cant be interrupted, are
> time based, or just plain must be given time when they need it...like
> moving a mouse maybe?  maybe you aught to take a second look at how many
> things go on in a typical windows/mac event loop sometime?
> 
> face it, there really are two kinds of multitasking...perhaps what you
> really mean to lament is who controls the tasks.  preemptive multi is
> controlled by the OS (tuned by the user) and cooperative multi is
> controlled by what ever program has the hackey sack at the time. :)



That is why there are OSes such as UNIX and NT. They not only preemtively 
multitask, but also support task priorities. If a task executing can not be 
interrupted, then it is executed at a higher priority level than other 
processes. W95 does not support priority levels, and as such would make a poor 
choice as a platform for real-time applications.