Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu From: awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: How do we change the scheduler? (Was Re: Multitasking at home...) Message-ID: <42499@ut-emx.uucp> Date: 14 Jan 91 19:19:12 GMT References: <17210@cbmvax.commodore. <7504@sugar.hackercorp.com> <42459@ut-emx.uucp> <7511@sugar.hackercorp.com> Sender: news@ut-emx.uucp Reply-To: awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) Organization: The University of Texas at Austin Lines: 27 In article <7511@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >Hmmm, last time I checked Multifinder required a Mac-II. I'll have to go >down and watch Multifinder on a stock Classic some time. Given how much of >a dog it is on a stock II I'm not expecting much. I've run MultiFinder on the Mac Plus and up. I run a network of 30-odd Macs, of which about 10 are running MultiFinder with 2.5 meg of RAM. The only problem people have is RAM shortages. (Part of this is due to running lots of toys like custom desktop patterns and event sounds.) >Well, I can only work with what I've seen. And I've seen little on the Mac to >make me expect Multifinder to be usable on a Classic. It just chews up too much >RAM and CPU covering for applications that expect a single-tasking environment. The major use of MF is task switching. My guess is that for the kinds of things you probably do on an Amiga, it would be a dog. MF is fine for WP while downloading a file. >Insinuating that I don't now "my own machine" because I'm not as impressed by >multifinder as you would like is a low debating trick. You interested in >communicating or "winning" here? It actually wasn't intended as a debating trick. I was angry that you'd posted a piece of blatant misinformation. I apologize. I get really annoyed when seeing comparisons of platforms where one side is unnecessarily handicapped that way.