Xref: utzoo comp.os.minix:6597 comp.sys.amiga:37528 comp.sys.amiga.tech:6357
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!kurt
From: kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: OS9 for the Amiga
Keywords: minix,amiga,OS9
Message-ID: <9974@fluke.COM>
Date: 28 Jul 89 15:10:45 GMT
References: <560@acp.OZ> <7433@cbmvax.UUCP> <1299@mcrware.UUCP>
Sender: news@tc.fluke.COM
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 16

I don't know about OS/9 for the Amiga, but I've used OS/9-68K for about four
years now.  I wonder why you'd want to run it.

OS/9 is multitasking and somewhat more multiuser than AmoebaDOS, but how
many of us timeshare amigas.  There's only one terminal on an amiga that
will get any graphics goodies.

OS/9 is a little more UNIX-like than AmoebaDOS, but not that much.  ADOS has
way better interprocess communication tha OS/9.  OS/9 has no graphics
support at all.  I doubt there's much speed advantage to OS/9.  OS/9 has a
very stable C compiler, but I don't bet the code generator will blow either
Lattice or Manx's doors off.

If you get a chance to run OS/9 for free, and you enjoy learning new os's
every week, go ahead.  But don't pay very much for the priviledge.  It's not
going to make any big impression on you.