Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!husc6!cfa!rwallace
From: rwallace@vax1.tcd.ie
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Multiprocessing-Multitasking
Message-ID: <1516@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU>
Date: 20 Apr 89 21:55:11 GMT
References: <12700@louie.udel.EDU> <7819@killer.Dallas.TX.US>
Sender: news@cfa.harvard.EDU
Organization: Computer Laboratory, Trinity College Dublin
Lines: 24

In article <7819@killer.Dallas.TX.US>, elg@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Eric Green) writes:
> in article <12700@louie.udel.EDU>, DAVEA%CERNVM.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (David Almond) says:
>> to burn precious space, is that the though the Amiga is multitaskingfor
>> all the reasions you outlined is not fully multitasking beause there
>> is no scheduler which controls overall running of tasks. So that it
>> would no how much spare capacity exists on each intelligent processing
>> device, as it processes, and thus be able to dispatch the next processing
>> task in the most efficent manner.
> 
> Say WHAAA??? are you SURE that you don't work for BYTE??? (Yes, I know
> that you denied it -- but this is typical of Byte misinformation).
> 
> The Amiga DOES have a central task scheduler -- what do you think Exec
> is?

Of course the super-smart mainframe OS task schedulers which can share out
.001 MIPS of processing power more fairly among tasks will gobble up a hundred
times that much processing power because they're so inefficiently written.
At least on the Amiga almost all the processor time actually goes to the tasks
not the multitasking system.

"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
rwallace@vax1.tcd.ie