Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!emory!gatech!purdue!ccncsu!mozart!klingspo From: klingspo@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Steve Klingsporn) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: All about sys 7.0 Message-ID: <13867@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU> Date: 30 Mar 91 20:51:51 GMT References: <1991Mar21.095051.29206@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <593@genco.bungi.com> Sender: news@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU Organization: Colorado State University Lines: 81 In article <593@genco.bungi.com> rad@genco.bungi.com (Bob Daniel) writes: >Try bringing up a dialog and watch all background >processes come to a hault. Try pulling down a menu bar (even under Sys7) >and watch everything stop. During a download, pull up a dialog from another >application and watch the download come to a hault and eventually cancel out. >While an application has a progress dialog up, try putting it in the >background and pull up something else. When you bring up a dialog, if things are programmed correctly, other background applications DO NOT come to a halt, but rather run as usual. This includes any programs that are downloading, drawing to the screen, what have you. When you pull down the menuBar, app's in the background could conceivably draw over the menuBar. It's possible to write your own menu handling routines, and keep processes running -- even different threads in your own program. I've downloaded MANY things before with dialogs on-screen. What kind of applications are you running? Up-to-date ones? I believe there is something called "GetNextEvent" or "WaitNextEvent" that you should call from your application to give other applications the time they deserve. You'll want to note that people who say "The Amiga is a true multitasking system" also suffer from the fact that when a menu is down (or even the mouse button, sometimes), things seemingly come to a halt. >Alot of this has been improved in Sys7 with "semi-modal" dialogs but does Apple >really think the current MF is really Multitasking? OK, so it's "cooperative- >multitasking", but is MF really all that cooperative? Only if the developer >makes it friendly? I don't think so, even if the developer uses modal dialogs, >he/she has no control of allowing background tasking to occur (without doing >some acrobatic tricks). Even under Sys7, he/she would have to convert ALL >modal dialogs to "semi-modal" dialogs to allow background *tasks* to continue. >Then there is menus. Even under Sys7, pulling down a menu will hault all >background tasks. Big deal. Write your own menu code. I've yet to see anything in unix/X-Windows that is all that impressive. Nor, do I think NeXT has that impressie of software, so why are you complaining? >I like MF alot and I like Sys7 a whole lot but it bothers me that Apple >would consider MF to be multitasking (even if you consider it to be, it >isn't very cooperative). Making a statement like that makes it appear >that they don't need to improve the multitaskiness of the Mac. > The first Macintosh applications weren't designed to multitask. It would take a gross System overhaul to impliment "true" multitasking on the Macintosh. Besides, how many things can YOU do at once? The Macintosh does a very good job of handling multiple processes. I love it. There really isn't a problem, as I see it, with the MacOS' Process Manager (7.0). >Maybe it's just that I'm spoiled with UNIX, but that statement does make >me squirm. I hope Sys8 will address the issues I've mentioned. I feel >it should not be up to the developer to be responsible for the >"multitaskiness" and that it should be controlled from the operating >system. Sys8 could compete with OS/2 and UNIX if it was capable of >preemptive multitasking. > OS/2 is crap. Unix is primitive. I guess it's one of the better command-oriented operating systems I've seen, yet it's quite unfriendly. Using a Macintosh is a learning experience & seems quite easy to figure out, no matter which application(s) you are running. Unix isn't. In fact, without documentation, the only real way to find out commands is to do 'help or 'man and see what commands are cross-referenced in the end. Plus, Man kinda sucks. Overall, Macintosh is the clear-cut advantage. A/UX has "True" Multitasking. It can be done on a Mac, bu t I don't think it's all that necessary. >I'd like to hear unflammable comments... >moof moof, >Bob Daniel >rad@genco.uucp Moof!!!!!