Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!portal!cup.portal.com!thad
From: thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: AMIGA
Message-ID: <37977@cup.portal.com>
Date: 13 Jan 91 11:35:37 GMT
References: <1991Jan10.151816.13893@rice.edu>
  <1991Jan11.071410.16032@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <37883@cup.portal.com>
  <1991Jan12.092901.6922@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <37927@cup.portal.com>
  <7502@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 47

peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) in <7502@sugar.hackercorp.com>
writes:

	In article <37927@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan)
	writes:
	> SCORE:  AmigaDOS: 0.5   UNIX: 9.0    You:1

	Many of your points against AmigaDOS are points against particular
	applications. There are big system-churning applications on UNIX,
	too...  such as GNU Emacs. But I've been able to edit files larger
	than available memory on UNIX since the days when "available memory"
	meant "whatever is left out of 64K once you allow for the stack and
	static data".

	SCORE:  PC-Ware applications: 0, Real programmers: 10.

I know.  And I know people who have GNU EMACS as their login shell.  And you
shouldv'e seen the wide-eyed look on a colleague's face when, right in the
middle of composing a report for TeX in EMACS, I opened another window and
made a binary patch to the kernel file ("/unix") within EMACS itself (yes,
this can be done if you don't shift bytes).

But Mike kept citing programs by name, and I couldn't resist a satirical
rebuttal.  I do disagree with some of his contentions, and I trust those did
show through the ``scorekeeping "fun-'n-games".''

Another point Mike overlooked was the requirement for STACK under AmigaOS.
Under UNIX, it's never a problem, it grows as needed "automagically." On all
my Amigas, I have a default stack size of 70000 just to avoid any possibility
of a guru given some unforeseen program or memory requirements; that stack
setting is totally wasteful for 99.9% of what I do, but if I don't do it I'm
guaranteed a guru in no time; even though it takes only about 15 or so seconds
to reboot, I don't relish the thought of losing something that might be going
on in another (background) process.

Mike kept emphasizing SPEED! PERFORMANCE! etc. as if he was still using MS-DOS
where one's only hope is a faster clock.  And think of the WASTE with DOS on a
33 MHz '486 or Finder on a Mac IIfx sitting in a spin-busy wait-loop doing
nothing until, say, the HD has transferred another sector of data or printing
has finished.

In terms of PEOPLE PRODUCTIVITY, a system like the present multi-tasking Amiga
is great.  I've "converted" and weaned-away-from-DOS many people who just
couldn't believe what they were seeing when I showed them how I use Amigas to
to "multiple" things at one time in REAL, not gimmicked, situations.

Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com ]