Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!umd5!uvaarpa!virginia!kesmai!dca
From: dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Fuel for the flames!
Keywords: journalism and things
Message-ID: <170@kesmai.COM>
Date: 9 Jun 88 20:16:45 GMT
References: <55608@sun.uucp> <7451@swan.ulowell.edu>
Organization: Kesmai Corporation, Charlottesville, VA
Lines: 31

In article <7451@swan.ulowell.edu>, page@swan.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) writes:
> Eric Rosenthal, GM of audio-visual systems engineering at ABC Television:
> >But so far it doesn't run on a machine we can trust.
> 
> No need to flame Rosenthal.  Facts are facts.  When the Amiga OS can
> protect programs from scribbling over each other, it will be a
> trustworthy machine.  Until then, only hackers, desperados and
> masochists will use it.
> 
> ..Bob
> -- 
> Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept.  page@swan.ulowell.edu  ulowell!page
What the hell are you talking about?  We are comparing the MAC II running
in Macintosh mode to the Amiga.  You think the MAC II is any more stable?
Hah!  A runaway process will still stomp the machine on the MAC II just
like it does on the Amiga.  Same for IBMs.  It should be obvious that these
people wouldn't understand multi-tasking or process protection if it walked up
and bit them.  What they can understand is:
'business machine. duh. Apple, IBM duh.'
While the Amiga is powerful it still isn't a business machine and
its questionable if it ever will be an accepted business machine.
These jokers want machines with comforting labels on the front.
Well I don't know if I'm a hacker, a desperado, or a masochist but I
certainly have no trouble classifing you.  I will try to display more 
more maturity than you seem to possess and keep it to myself.  
Fact is, if your processes are well behaved process protection is
irrelevant.  When I'm not testing applications I wrote I rarely have any
problems with processes scribbling on each other.  This is not to
say that I wouldn't like to have process protection just that it isn't
really a requirement any more than it has been for Apple and IBM.

David Albrecht