home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.microsoft.com!news
- From: plummer@iceonline.com (Dave Plummer)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Subject: Re: Computerworld Norway is telling us lies about Amiga....
- Date: 5 Feb 1996 19:26:59 GMT
- Organization: Silicon Prairie Software
- Message-ID: <4f5lm3$2it@news.microsoft.com>
- References: <3106440F.738D@edb.uib.no> <4e9fml$gcc@news.microsoft.com> <4eavv9$r4p@oban.cc.ic.ac.uk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 157.55.86.60
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14
-
- In article <4eavv9$r4p@oban.cc.ic.ac.uk>, ajh1@ic.ac.uk says...
- >
- >>>Besides Windows 95 is not offering real multitasking!!!!!!!
- >>
- >>And in what particular sense is Win95 not real multitasking? I will
- >>grant that the Win16Mutex() can cause problems, but the same deal
- >>exists on the Amiga if a process locks up inside of a Forbid() block.
- >>(Actually, its far worse on the Amiga).
- >
- >Yes, but isn't the win95 way cheating.... The machines run a lot slower because
- >their multitasking is done with a stack system (ie this prog for a bit, now
- >this one, now this one etc). Taht must be one of the major reasons for win95
- >to being so much slower than old win, on all but the absolute top end
- >machines...
- >Sorry if my info is wrong, flame me...
-
- Nope, no flame, but... "run one program for a while, then another..."... isn't
- that exactly what the Amiga does? And what is "stack based"? Both the Amiga
- and Win95 need to preserve registers and process stacks across context switches.
-
- And the urban legend that Win95 is slower than Win31 is a little stale...
-
- - Dave
-
- PS: If anyone knows how I can network my A2500-30 to my NT Server, let me know.
- I've asked several times, but no one seems to know! NFS? Help!
-
-