Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:34572 comp.sys.mac:32680
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!okstate!norman
From: norman@a.cs.okstate.edu (Norman Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Apple System 7.0
Message-ID: <4704@okstate.UUCP>
Date: 30 May 89 03:35:22 GMT
References: <3846@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater
Lines: 54

From article <3846@sugar.hackercorp.com>, by peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva):
> In article <4679@okstate.UUCP>, norman@a.cs.okstate.edu (Norman Graham) writes:
>> May I be so bold as to suggest Harvey Deitel's "An Introduction to 
>> Operating Systems" Revised First Edition ...
> 
> I've got that book, an old edition. Any book on operating systems that
> includes extensive discussions of CP/M (or probably MS-DOS, now) is
> hardly something to hold up as an authority.
> 
> Could I hold up Comer's "Xenix" book as an alternative?

That's a pretty cheap shot at Deital's book Peter. Yes, it contains
a case study of CP/M (in addition to case studies of UNIX, VMS, and
IBM's MVS and VM operating systems). But this does not detract from
the execellence of the preceeding 500 pages of operating systems
theory.

BTW, Comer's book is on XINU... not Xenix. And I found his book a 
little short on operating systems theory, although it is an 
execellent discussion of the XINU system and I highly recommend it
to those who are interested in wading around in the actual source
for an operating system.

>> BTW, I plead with all intelligent computerists to cease to use the term
>> "TRUE MULTITASKING". If by "true multitasking" you mean multitasking
>> with preemptive job scheduling (or preemptive multitasking) by all means
>> say this.
> 
> True multitasking means you can take a vanilla implementation of Emacs, compile
> it, and run it... without interfering with your ability to concurrently run
> without significant degradation, during the entire process, a regular
> commercial program like Photon Paint or Word Perfect.
> 
> A better term would, perhaps, be transparent multitasking. Something that
> implies that conventional non-event-loop programs can be productively run
> under it.

No No No! A better term is the one used for the past 15 or 20 years...
'Multitasking with Preemptive Task Scheduling' or 'Preemptive Multitasking'.
Transparent multitasking is still ambiguous: Is it transparent to the 
programmer, program, or user? People could see the term and still not
know that you were speaking of a preemptive system.

Ah *ell, call it whatever you want... I'm weary of my little crusade.

> Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva      `-_-'
> ...texbell!sugar!peter, or peter@sugar.hackercorp.com  'U`

+Norm
-- 
Norman Graham                            Oklahoma State University
  Internet:  norman@a.cs.okstate.edu     Computing and Information Sciences
      UUCP:  {cbosgd, rutgers}           219 Mathematical Sciences Building
              !okstate!norman            Stillwater, OK  74078-0599