Xref: utzoo comp.sys.atari.st:6649 comp.sys.amiga:12222
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ames!rutgers!mtune!codas!killer!elg
From: elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st,comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Multi-tasking? A nightmare...
Message-ID: <2598@killer.UUCP>
Date: 28 Dec 87 07:40:26 GMT
References: <3256@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu>
Organization: Bayou Telecommunications
Lines: 64

in article <3256@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu>, davidli@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu (Dave Meile) says:
> 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
> 
> Most of those who read these forums fall under the "programming" category.
> Of course, for programmers, multitasking can be a delight.  For the person
> who is writing a term paper on the microcomputer, why bother?  If you have
> 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.

Let's face it, even a Timex Sinclair with 16K of RAM can do all of the above
(just a bit slow and limited). A boat-anchor CP/M system can also do all of
the above, and would be cheaper (nowadays) besides. But I sure the hell
don't like to use one after I've used BSD4.2 & other OS's that take advantage
of multitasking. 

For example, take the term paper. I'm using an 8-bit single-tasking system
right now. I set it to printing. Then I go away for 20 minutes while my NX-10
bangs away in near letter quality mode (more "near" than "letter", but that's
the breaks!). That irritates me. Greatly. There's a couple of things I could
do here: Use my RAM-disk and jam a software interrupt-driven spooler on my
LST: device (multitasking!), go out and buy a 512K print spooler (multitasking
again, although in this case with a dedicated processor), or any other number
of things. All of which are multitasking. All of which are a kludge, and would
be unnecessary if real multitasking was available.

I remember my first computer. 5K of RAM, 16K of ROM, I was in hawg heaven, a
computer all my own, to hack in 6502 assembly language on. I lusted for 16K,
because with 16K, you can do anything, right? 64K? forget it, 64K was for rich
folks with $2,000 to buy the latest CP/M boat-anchor (so-called because of its
size and weight, in this case :-). Disk drives? Why would anybody want disk
drives? I can load and save just fine with my cassette recorder! 

Then I moved up to a 64K machine with a disk drive. Wow. Big time now. I'll
never take that 5K machine out of the closet again (even tho I expanded it to
16K). After all, it's just an obsolete toy now, right?  and 64K... I can do
ANYTHING! Wow, what power.  Why would I want one of them fancy dandy 68000
machines, 'specially when they all cost $5,000 for 256K of RAM, and I can do
everything they can, on my li'l min-anchor? I mean, I can process words, I can
write programs, I can play games... they do all that, right?


There's 2 points I wish to make:
    1) Some features added to the computer make it more productive and easier
to use (compare cassette deck to floppy drive to hard drive!).
    2) Most of us are notoriously short on foresight, like I was when I
thought that 64K and a floppy drive was the epitomy of computing (after all, I
can do everything you can, right? I can process words, play games, etc.?).

 While you may not see the use of multitasking, I bet you're as foresighted
now as I was 10 years ago when I thought that 16K of RAM was big-time for a
microcomputer.

--
Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET        Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191       
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg            Lafayette, LA 70509             
"There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PF