Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!ucsd!mvb.saic.com!ncr-sd!crash!nusdecs!nusjecs!ozonebbs!vsolanoy
From: vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solanoy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Amiga OS *IS* state of the art
Keywords: Amiga OS
Message-ID: <86aJZ2w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP>
Date: 28 Mar 91 19:40:30 GMT
References: <7827@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>
Distribution: usa
Organization: The ()zone BBS, +1 408 223 1738
Lines: 33

barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes:

> In article <1003@cbmger.UUCP> peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) write
> >Just having scanned through the latest BYTE issue (March issue,
> >they seem to use rowing boats to ship here to Europe), I gathered
> >more confirmation for the fact that our Amiga OS really is state
> >of the art in OSes:
> 
> 	Now now... let's not get carried away.  The Amiga OS is very, very
> nice, that is true.  I like it a lot.  But no way is it "state of the art"
> in the 1990's!
> 
> 	For example, it doesn't have:
> 
> 		-	Virtual memory
> 		-	Memory protection
> 		-	Resource tracking
> 		-	Multi-user capabilities
> 
> Even if it did, these ideas are *old*, and not "state of the art".
> 
> 	If you want to see a "state of the art" operating system, take a
> look at current research at places like University of Illinois (CHOICES) and
> AT&T (various successors to UNIX; I forget the names).
> 
> >...BYTE Magazine....
> 

Some of the weaknesses you mention are probably a result of the limited 
abilities of the 68000 processor used in 'stock' Amigas... and not the 
operating itself.
 
 Victor