Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!bath63!pes
From: pes@ux63.bath.ac.uk (Smee)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: MacMultitasking...almost
Message-ID: <2170@bath63.ux63.bath.ac.uk>
Date: 15 Feb 88 20:08:10 GMT
References: <8802100646.AA16770@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: pes@ux63.bath.ac.uk (Smee)
Organization: AUCC c/o University of Bath
Lines: 8


Oh golly, I wish you hadn't said that.  Still, long as you mention it, I
don't mind multi-processes sharing processors.  What I object to is them
sharing memory and peripherals.  When someone comes up with a 'home'
micro with individual protected memory 'partitions' for each process, with
all inter-process communications and all external device use forced
through (secure gated) entries in the O/S, *then* I will believe in
multi-tasking on home machines...