Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!davewt
From: davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: True Multitasking
Message-ID: <1991Jan28.220234.29712@NCoast.ORG>
Date: 28 Jan 91 22:02:34 GMT
References: <42598@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <678@tnc.UUCP> <1991Jan27.100824.6629@marlin.jcu.edu.au>
Organization: North Coast Public Access Un*x (ncoast)
Lines: 33

In article <1991Jan27.100824.6629@marlin.jcu.edu.au> glmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matt Crowd) writes:
>I don't know about calling it a feature!  I am sick of the 
>lack of memory protection.  I would definitely endure slightly slower
>performance and the need for some major software re-writes
>for it.
	Then you are in the minority of Amiga owners. Most would prefer
it, if it didn't hamper current programs, and I don't know anyone who
is against it if future programs could be written which supported it,
as long as current programs could be run as well.
	Personally, I am GLAD the Amiga is not Unix, and does not try to
be. If I wanted Unix I would use it (3000UX). Unix is like a big
old-fashioned Cadilac. It includes things for every user that many users
don't want/need, and protects everyone behind battleship strength security
and impact resistance. The Amiga is like a compact sports car. When you
hit a bump, you know it. But if it is driven by a knowledgeable driver,
the results are far better than anything a Caddy could ever do.
	And if the software is written correctly, the user will never
even know that there is no memory protection. If you have used 2.0 you
will have seen (if you have been able to guru your machine, I haven't
been able to in about a year) the "Task Held" requester, which is about as
close to memory protection as many people will ever need.
	And if you are a developer (the only ones who would be writing
any new software) you are a fool to develop and run critical software on the
same machine, in any OS (I work in Unix 3.2.2 all day, and I would never
think of running production code on the same machine a develop on).
>
>When a 1 line C program can bring down the system......
>
	Gee, I guess this also includes Unix, Xenix, MS-DOS, and the Mac
too, right?


			Dave