home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Message-ID: <w+v73MD4FC8apzE@_crisi.blackbox.shnet.org>
- From: CRISI@BLACKBOX.shnet.org (Christian)
- Path: blackbox.shnet.org!CRISI
- Organization: .oO PHANTASM Oo.
- Subject: Re: Why I switched from the Amiga
- Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:27:19 +0100
- X-Mailer: MicroDot 1.10 [REGISTERED 004fc8]
- References: <4bngub$2k4@madrid.visi.net>, <peterk.0jya@combo.ganesha.com>
- X-Gateway: ZCONNECT US genepi.shnet.org [UNIX/Connect v0.71]
- MIME-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
-
- It was 11.01.1996 at 00:01:23 when peterk@combo.ganesha.com (Dr. Peter Kittel)
- wrote about "Re: Why I switched from the Amiga":
- DK> In article <DKqMnv.IHx@eskimo.com> drizzit@eskimo.com (G. Baldwin) writes:
- DK> >Action Jackson (ajackson@alladin.demon.co.uk) wrote:
- DK> >
- DK> >: 1) No Memory protection! Sounds Trivial? But Programmer productivity
- DK> >: is Low is the machine keeps crashing!!!
- DK>
- DK> If you program cleanly from start and don't just "experiment with code",
- DK> you won't crash your Amiga so often.
-
- But it will continue crashing. That's no excuse. With a similar
- argument you could also say "Why using directories ? If you give your
- files the right names, you can go without them.".
-
- DK> accesses, but there's another big issue: For memory protection, the
- DK> whole messaging system of the OS would have to be changed e.g. to a
- DK> system where messages are copied instead of just passing pointers.
- DK> This would mean a big hit in a) performance and b) memory consumption.
- DK>
-
- Yes, that's the price. But it's worth it. BTW, copying messages
- won't solve the problem. Most messages have data attached to it (e.g.
- IntuiMessages, DosPackets etc). The OS cannot copy this additional
- data because it doesn't know where it is and how it is organized,
- especially when handlig message constructions that aren't defined by
- the OS. This means that many programs currently in use won't run with
- memory protection. The only solution would be that many programs have
- to be rewritten if they want to support it. In addition, you should
- be able to switch off memory protection for all those programs that
- won't be updated.
-
- Greetings
-
- --
- Christian Wasner (CRISI/ PHANTASM)
- crisi@blackbox.shnet.org
- (wasner@ifmsun1.ifm.uni-hamburg.de and u241045@niesel.dkrz.d400.de may
- be killed in the near future)
- Sorry, but you haven't won a cookie in today's lottery
-