Wayne%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU (Wayne McGuire) (10/02/86)
Apropos the issue of what sort of multitasking operating/windowing system,
GEM-based or otherwise, one would like to see on the new generation of
Atari machines, this week's _Infoworld_, in a highly enthusiastic review of
Simultask for the AT&T 6300 Plus, describes a few essential features:
"With Simultask, AT&T has pulled off an amazing stunt: This system
runs Unix System V and offers MS-DOS as a task under Unix. What is amazing
is that the MS-DOS task is as capable, compatible, and speedy as it is.
MS-DOS in Simultask runs MS-DOS programs with the speed and compatibility
of any 6-MHz PC AT compatible. In one instance, we found Simultask's
MS-DOS more PC compatible than running MS-DOS directly....
"The AT&T 6300 Plus running Simultask offers an elegant one-box
solution for those wishing to access both Unix and MS-DOS. You can use
binary information in either environment with ease, and text information is
easily converted from MS-DOS format to Unix and back."
Question: has anyone on the list taken a close look at Simultask? The
review remarks that Simultask runs within an (apparently windowing)
interface/shell called PC 6300 Plus Office that is somewhat slower than
Microsoft Windows and Desqview, and not quite as sophisticated as the AT&T
7300 user interface. How does this interface compare with the Mac/GEM
style of windowing? Is it a suitable model for a 4-meg multitasking Atari?
On a related topic: is anyone on the list aware of any recent research
reports or studies which exhaustively compare, contrast, and evaluate the
features of currently available windowing systems (X, Xerox, Sun,
Symbolics, Microsoft, Macintosh, GEM, etc.)?
Wayne McGuire
(wayne@oz.ai.mit.edu)tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (10/04/86)
Wayne%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU (Wayne McGuire) typed: > >Question: has anyone on the list taken a close look at Simultask? The >review remarks that Simultask runs within an (apparently windowing) >interface/shell called PC 6300 Plus Office that is somewhat slower than >Microsoft Windows and Desqview, and not quite as sophisticated as the AT&T >7300 user interface. How does this interface compare with the Mac/GEM >style of windowing? Is it a suitable model for a 4-meg multitasking Atari? > The windowing system on the 6300 Plus is not really a general windowing system ( at least on the ones I have seen. The ones I have seen are kind of old, so this may have changed ). When you run the thing, you get a box on the screen that looks something like this: XXX Office XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X -Administration X X Commands X X Printer Information X X Unix System X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX The "X"s are really solid rectangles of inverse video, and the command with the "-" next to it is in inverse video. You use the arrow keys to move up and down the menu and hit return to select an item. Some commands bring up other menus, for example, "Commands" makes the screen look like this. .Office.................. . . . Administation . . -Commands X Commands XXXXXXXXXX . Printer X X . Unix SystX -Color X . X DOS-to-UNIX X ............X Logout X X Shutdown X X UNIX-to-DOS X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX At the bottom of the screen are labels for the function keys. It also supports something that is like what a Mac user would call a Dialog Box. For example, selecting "DOS-to-UNIX" clears the screen and draws this: XX DOS-to-UNIX Copy XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X MS-DOS File: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X UNIX File: X X X X Replace Mode X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Compared to Mac, ST, Amiga, etc, this is not that impressive. Compared to MS-DOS, it is perhaps something to get excited about. The way the 6300 Plus runs DOS tasks is kind of interesting. UNIX runs in protected mode, and DOS wants to be in real mode. They have implemented some external ( to the CPU ) mapping hardware so that they can have memory that is not available to real mode. They put DOS in the memory that is available to real mode, and all the UNIX stuff in the memory that isn't. To switch to the DOS task, they RESET the CPU ( this is the only way to go from protected mode to real mode ). The DOS task then runs in real mode. When it needs to do something that UNIX needs to know about, the external hardware makes the CPU go back to real mode and UNIX runs. ( There is also a watchdog timer to force this if a DOS task gets into a loop ). The person who thought of this is either a genius, or insane ( probably both! ) -- member, all HASA divisions POELOD ECBOMB -------------- ^-- Secret Satanic Message Tim Smith USENET: sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim Compuserve: 72257,3706 Delphi or GEnie: mnementh