Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ulowell!cbmvax!higgin
From: higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (Paul Higginbottom MKT)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: simple multitasking examples
Message-ID: <5988@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 16 Feb 89 14:46:09 GMT
References: <2225@van-bc.UUCP> <89581@sun.uucp> <6405@dayton.UUCP> <89751@sun.uucp>
Reply-To: higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (Paul Higginbottom MKT)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 58

In article <89751@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes:
$...When you start to see the power of multitasking on
$a personal scale is when you can push a window to the back and bring
$up another application, even running them side by side exchanging 
$data.

This can be done with Microsoft Windows under MS-DOS, unless you mean
that the programs are actually all doing something instead of being
idle, such as the dots/lines demos, etc.

It's important to note the following:

1. A USER CAN ONLY BE INTERACTING WITH ONE PROGRAM AT A TIME.
(Guess we could have multiple mice, or disconnected input streams -
keystrokes go to this program, mouse clicks to that,
ugh, how many people can juggle well?)

2. MOST APPLICATIONS ARE IDLE UNLESS THE USER IS INTERACTING WITH IT.
We type a key, click the mouse, etc, and the program does a bit of work
and then goes to sleep again.  Exceptions are rendering, file transfer, etc.

3. "SWITCHING" BETWEEN PROGRAMS IS USEFUL BECAUSE IT ALLOWS THE USER TO
STOP 'INTERACTING' WITH ONE PROGRAM AND START INTERACTING WITH ANOTHER.
We all use this capability to format disks while the wordprocessor is still
loaded, to pop up a cli to change or create an assignment before clicking
RETRY on a System Requester, etc.

So it would seem that switching is useful for most situations, but
multi-tasking becomes useful when there is a need to run programs other
than the program the user is interacting with that don't require interaction
(e.g rendering).  Let's face it, spell-checking a large document (which requires
interaction), and entering data into a database at the same time is not really
useful.

I'd like to know what's wrong with this argument.  For example, I am
right now, running a terminal program in my office here at Commodore on my
Amiga.  On the Workbench I have a word processor and a desktop publishing
program running also.  This is SLICK, but (and I hate to admit it) I've
done similar things on Microsoft Windows.  The ONLY difference is when I
start an xmodem transfer and then click the screen to the back and continue
working on another application.  This is GREAT, but not necessarily a
mainstream application.

Please don't start a war on this subject, I'm just trying to look at the
way switching, single-tasking, and multi-tasking can be used and which offers
what benefits.  Technically, there's no question the Amiga is GREAT, and as
netters, we probably all use the things I've talked about but the trick is
to explain it as a benefit to a wider audience.  One GREAT use of multi-tasking
potentially though, is sound and video TOGETHER.  Not what your average office
worker wants again, but definitely marketable.

$Believe me, when Jerry Pournelle
$says he can't live without multitasking you can be sure that it has 
$"arrived." 

I agree!

	Paul.