Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!rice!elf.rice.edu!doubt
From: doubt@elf.rice.edu (Douglas Benjamin Triggs)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: How do we change the scheduler? (Was Re: Multitasking at home...)
Message-ID: <1991Jan22.183746.27565@rice.edu>
Date: 22 Jan 91 18:37:46 GMT
References: <1991Jan18.231330.16290@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <7553@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1991Jan21.004720.25985@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <12880@life.ai.mit.edu> <1991Jan21.055854.14130@rice.edu> <1991Jan21.205623.3867@rice.edu> <1991Jan21.221744.5966@rice.edu>
Sender: news@rice.edu (News)
Reply-To: doubt@elf.rice.edu (Douglas Benjamin Triggs)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rice University
Lines: 56

In article <1991Jan21.221744.5966@rice.edu>, jsd@boreal.rice.edu (Shawn Joel
Dube) writes:

|> |> |> |>   Amiga   Time --->
|> |> |> |> Task A  |********        ********        ********        ********>
|> |> |> |> Task B  |        ********        ********        ********        >
|> |> |> |> 
|> |> |> |>   Mac   
|> |> |> |> Task A  |*****               **     ****** *************  **  ***>
|> |> |> |> Task B  |     ***************  *****      *             **  **   >
|> |> |> |> 
|> |> 
|> 
|> |> No, a program running under AmigaOS would not waste any time doing
|> |> nothing (waiting for that keypress).  It would skip that task and do the
|> |> others, unless the programmer is a complete idiot (which, alas, some seem
|> |> to be).  A more accurate graph would be:
|> |> 
|> |>   Amiga   Time --->
|> |> Task A  |****        **                            ****        ****>
|> |> Task B  |    ****      ****    ****    ****    ****        ****    >
|> |> Task C  |        ****      ****    ****    ****        ****        >
|> |>                        ^ point A                 ^ point B
|> |> 
|> |> (Where task A is waiting for a keypress between points A and B.)
|> |> 
|> 
|> Now compare Doug's chart to the one above.  Which does it most look like?
|> I would say that it looks mostly like the Mac's becuase each task is not
|> getting equal CPU time.  
|> 
|> -- 
|> rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
|> r     ___     _                                          r
|> r    /__     | \           N U K E   I R A Q ! ! !       r
|> r   ___/hawn |__\ube       -----------------------       r
|> r  jsd@owlnet.rice.edu                                   r
|> rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

The graphs are not what I would call "similar."  The Mac's tasking is jerky,
and the Amiga's is somewhat smoother (to say the least).  In any case, on
the Amiga, no program can take exclusive control of the CPU unless it does
something special, while on the Mac, an incorrectly written program can
easily do this, unless it does something special to avoid it.

Doubtfully yours,
--my name here--

--- doubt@owlnet.rice.edu --- GM # 8400000E
       _ _
doubt ////    o MacIntosh, adj., idiotic, braindead, terminally       __  /|
 _ _ ////       stupid.  Usage:  "That manual is 'macintosh'"         \'o.O'
 \\\X///        see also:  useless; overpriced; ripoff                =(___)=
  \XXX/       o Lotus, v., synonym for "sucks."  Usage:  "Lotus          U
                (sucks)."  see also:  federal juristiction invol-
"O.A.M.I.P."    ving CD's, state borders, and immoral purposes       Oop! Ack!