Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!cmm1 From: cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: TOS 2.0 Keywords: TOS NEODESK DCDESKTOP ROMS Message-ID: <1990Nov8.143625.1457@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Date: 8 Nov 90 14:36:25 GMT References: <1990Nov06.213749.13906@ecst.csuchico.edu> <1990Nov7.144925.10232@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <1990Nov07.185434.18457@ecst.csuchico.edu> Sender: news@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Daily News) Organization: Columbia University Lines: 66 In article <1990Nov07.185434.18457@ecst.csuchico.edu> ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen) writes: >cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Christopher M Mauritz) writes: > >- MS-DOS and Macs take a few seconds to boot, but I don't see people >- complaining about that. > >From a cold boot, my BBS is up and in "waitring" mode in 20 seconds. >It takes the Mac IIfx I use close to a minute, if not more just to >get to the desktop. I'm complaining. That is ridiculous. I have a MacIIcx in front of me with 7 INITS that load up on bootup and it takes approximately 10-15 seconds to get the desktop when I power up. I think you are exaggerating. > >- You just can't argue with the fact that the Mac and MS-DOS OS' >- have been regularly updated and cleansed of bugs. > >And they're still slow and worthless. Now, I see why I think IIfx is >so slow: it's highly dependent on the hard drive. When you select a >drop down menu, for example, it reads the hard drive. Hehe, I think what we have here is a case of sour grapes. I don't know what programs you use,but I use MacIIcx's and fx's on a regular basis, and I think you are mis-representing the facts. > >- >On the otherhand, if the new TOS had something that the others don't >- >have, such as multitasking (e.g. MIDI-tasking), then I think there >- >would be many people out there in line (or on the phone to their >- >400-mile-away, local dealer) to get it. >- >- Or you could just call up David Beckemeyer and get a multitasking >- shell for the ST now and thumb your nose at Atari. > >I knew there was going to be trouble with this. I should have added >"easy-to-use." Sure, MT C-Shell with VSH is nice, but I don't like >command lines; if I did, I would have bought an IBM. We have a >graphics-based machine; why can't the multitasking interface be like >Multifinder or the Amiga's? Ah, now you tell us that you like Multifinder (I do too!) and the Amiga OS. If you dislike the ST OS so much then why did you buy one? You'll spend a long time waiting for a decent multi-tasking OS from Atari. Hell, they are just starting to get the bugs out of the single-tasking one! The TT doesn't even have a method of multitasking. It is, for all intents and purposes, just a faster, more expensive ST. None of the really innovative features of the 68030 are used (oops, they might use the burst fill mode...I'm not sure). Their version of unix will be out RSN, etc...ad nauseum... >As always. > >-- > Ed Krimen ............................................... > ||| Video Production Major, California State University, Chico > ||| INTERNET: ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu FREENET: al661 > / | \ SysOp, Fuji BBS: 916-894-1261 FIDONET: 1:119/4.0 Chris ------------------------------+--------------------------- Chris Mauritz |D{r det finns en |l, finns cmm1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |det en plan! (c)All rights reserved. | Send flames to /dev/null | ------------------------------+---------------------------