Xref: utzoo comp.sys.atari.st:6584 comp.sys.amiga:12038
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!labrea!Lindy!kevin
From: kevin@Lindy.STANFORD.EDU (Kevin Burnett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st,comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Multi-tasking? A nightmare...
Message-ID: <444@Lindy.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 23 Dec 87 20:17:27 GMT
References: <2168@crash.cts.com> <3256@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu> <2673@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Reply-To: kevin@Lindy.Stanford.EDU (Kevin Burnett)
Organization: Stanford Data Center
Lines: 59
Summary: *** SEVERE FLAME WARNING ***

In article <2673@gryphon.CTS.COM> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>>People want computers (when they want them at all) to DO SOMETHING for
>>them.  In the majority of cases with the Atari ST and the Amiga, that
>>"something" has been:
>>
>>	writing stuff
>>	filing stuff
>>	retrieving stuff that's been filed
>>	playing games
>>	programming all of the above
>
>Speak for yourself, you nit. You have no idea what *I* do, or what *I*
>need.
I don't believe he said anything about how YOU use your computer.
And, you're asking for this comment, ASSHOLE.
Last time I checked, "the majority of cases" doesn't mean 100%, does it?

>>access to two programs (ala Multifinder or perhaps through a "desk
>>accessory" [IBM PCs have desk accessories too, folks]) you already have
>>as much power as you're ever liable to need in most environments.
>                  ^^^^^^
>
>Speak for yourself, nit.

I believe he was, TWIT.

>I could not go back to a single tasking computer, nor would I accept
>a job programming one. Stone age.

Good for you, dude.

>Alright, thats it. For the last time, just because you dont want it/dont
>need it/can't understand it, don't for a second presuppose others
>dont want/need/understand multitasking.

He said that he didn't see any arguments why multitasking is a REQUIREMENT
for a microcomputer.  Thinking it's useful, and liking it don't cut it.

>Open mouth, insert foot. Open hand, take egg. Apply to face.

Do you do that often?  Perhaps you should seek therapy.

>P.S. This is not a flame. This is not even a spark. If you would
>like flames, I'll be glad to lay into you, you little jerk.
It sure sounds like a flame to me.  I'm not going to claim what I'm doing
isn't.  Why don't you crawl back under the rock from whence you came?

Why can't people just forget this stupid argument?  I bought my Atari
because it does what I wanted at the time, you bought your Amiga for the
same reason.  Why can't you just leave it at that?  When I bought my ST,
the Amiga was at least $600-$700 more expensive than the ST.  I didn't have
that extra money.  If I had, maybe I would have bought an Amiga.  Maybe not.

I don't need this damned "my computer is better than yours because mine does
x, nyah nyah nyah" bullshit.
-- 
Kevin Burnett
Stanford Linear Accelerator Centre / Santa Clara Class of '88
Arpa: kevin@Lindy.Stanford.EDU		Bitnet: KJBSF@SLACVM.BITNET
Old-style UUCP: ...!decwrl!labrea!Lindy!kevin