Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!decuac!shlump.nac.dec.com!bacchus.pa.dec.com!bacchus!mwm From: mwm@raven.relay.pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Amiga competitiveness Message-ID: Date: 18 Oct 90 18:54:09 GMT References: <90271.190320UH2@psuvm.psu.edu> <420@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> Sender: news@wrl.dec.com (News) Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica Lines: 22 In-Reply-To: cjeffery@cs.arizona.edu's message of 29 Sep 90 08:03:15 GMT In article <420@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> cjeffery@cs.arizona.edu (Clinton Jeffery) writes: Example #1: the amiga _can_ use memory better than MS-DOS, and worse than (any real flavor of) UNIX. (Go ahead, argue against this one saying that AmigaDOS requires much less memory. With 6 MB I am more concerned with OS protection from GURUS than with kernel size.) That's almost amusing. I'd be interested in seeing how you define "real" to justify the comment about Unix using memory better than AmigaDOS. Or maybe it's a wierd definition of "better". Me, I think that 100K of memory holding AmigaDOS is being much better used than 100K of memory holding Unix - the 100K holding Unix is completely wasted.