jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) (02/11/89)
The previous posting where someone wanted to know what multitasking
is and how the Amiga implements it, IBM implements it, Mac,...
etc. has brought forth this question...
What is the simplest example you can think of to demonstrate that
the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be
in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't
require a computer to be present.
I, like the other guy, don't want to start a flame war here. But,
after having heard yet another person say "The Amiga is just a
game machine" and this was in comparison to an Apple IIGS!!!
(I heard this from a friend who got this at a computer store, from
one of the hired help!) I want to be able to give these guys a
level headed reason why they are wrong :-).
Anyway, the point here is to come up with a quick, thoughtful,
expression of Amiga uniqueness wrt multitasking. Multiple windows
isn't it, nor is "multi processing" since some machines can emulate
this via programs that allow you to execute the most-commonly-used-
program-used-with-this-program (editors and comm packages, for
example). I think formatting two disks is it. This task clearly
does two things at once, this also isn't something in demand, so
communication packages (for example) probably won't have an option
for this (like they do editors).
My only problem is that it is too simple, I fully expect to either
1) explain why this is significant, or 2) leave the fellow fully
unimpressed. Any suggestions for other similar "thought experiments"?
(Ideally something that leaves someone walking away saying:
"Hmmmm, I thought my machine multitasked, but it can't
do that. I wonder how the Amiga does that?"
Sorry for rambling, but it is late.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Davis ..!att!ihlpm!jmdavis
char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}NETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks) (02/12/89)
I think the best example is using AREXX. A simple example would be how VLT and TxEd+ are able to work together. Two programs, running concurrently that are able to pass data back and forth to one another. I know that the Mac cannot do this. The PC might, but I cannot think of any specific examples at the moment. This is the best example of a "real world" use for multitasking I can think of at the moment. I'm sure that there are others. --hal
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (02/12/89)
In <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: >What is the simplest example you can think of to demonstrate that >the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be >in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't >require a computer to be present. The problem with this tack is that the MsDos type will usually say things like "Yes, I can do that because my terminal program (or editor, or whatever) allows me to do a dir (or delete or print, or whatever)." If it is something not covered by the program they are discussing, they will say "I can do that with a TSR program called 'blah'." When you are faced with answers like this, you should point out that on the Amiga, you are not limited by the program you are running, or limited to specialized TSR programs that must be loaded before getting into a situation where you need them. You can point out that on the Amiga, _any_ program can be run with any other program, provided that the programs are 'well behaved' and that they do not require the exclusive use of the same resources. By 'well behaved', I mean that the program was not written specifically to inhibit multitasking. >Anyway, the point here is to come up with a quick, thoughtful, >expression of Amiga uniqueness wrt multitasking. Multiple windows >isn't it, nor is "multi processing" since some machines can emulate >this via programs that allow you to execute the most-commonly-used- >program-used-with-this-program (editors and comm packages, for >example). I think formatting two disks is it. This task clearly >does two things at once, this also isn't something in demand, so >communication packages (for example) probably won't have an option >for this (like they do editors). Multiple windows (or more correctly, multiple programs) running at the same time is definitely it. The main thing though, is to point out that the Amiga is not limited in the same way as the MsDos machine, to particular programs. This is the whole advantage, really. Showing someone two programs running does nothing to show the real power, unless you point out the genrality of the solution, in addition to the fact that the other program is not of necessity idle, but can be performing useful work with otherwise wasted cycles. The other day, I was reading and answering messages on Compuserve, one of which was attempting to say that multitasking was not all that significant a feature. It was a fairly long message, so I wanted to do my usual capture of it for display in another CLI while I answered. I activated the ASCII capture and gave a filename of "VD0:temp", only to dscover that I had forgotten to mount VD0:, resulting in a request to put volume VD0: in any drive. At this point, there would have only been a few options open to the MsDos user; use another device, perhaps disk; exit the terminal program (perhaps even reboot) to install the ramdisk. I just clicked in another CLI and typed "mount VD0:". The requester went away, I clicked in the terminal program, and was back to normal. No muss, no fuss, no pain, and all in a matter of seconds. You can ask if all his programs allow all commands to be executed. Does his favourite spreadsheet allow any other editor to be brought up in order to reference another file? Does his database program allow him to bring up his favourite terminal program to dial in somewhere to check something out? TSRs are indeed a way to provide for functions that are left out of the program you are using, but they are limited to the functions that they perform, and you need to know in advance that you will be needing the function. I answer questions in online conferences in real time, and cannot imagine doing so to the same degree of accuracy and efficiency with a single tasking machine. If someone wants a piece of example code. I use another CLI to look at it, or an editor to cut it out and send it. If they want to know how they can use a program to do a particular function, I am not limited to my memory or the documentation for details. I can try it, then and there. I can even pipe the output through the serial port, or 'Snipit' from the CLI. If someone wants to know if program X will work with program Y, I can test that too, and without having to tell them I'll give them the answer tomorrow. There have been times when 3 or 4 of us have been sitting in the conferencing area, working on a program, passing a routine back and forth, making modifications, compiling, and testing, in order to optimize it or to add some functionality. Try these thigs on an MsDos machine, then laugh your buns off. A friend of mine writes reviews for our club newsletter. He gets very bent out of shape when a game inhibits multitasking, because he likes to play the game and use his favourite editor to write the review at the same time. He plays a bit, writes a bit, back and forth, getting his facts straight, making sure he doesn't forget any options or features, and so on. Note the key words in the previous paragraphs. 'favourite', 'options', and so on. Yes, Turbo Pascal has a nice, integrated environment. Do you like the Turbo Pascal editor? If so, can you use that editor with the assembler? can you use it with Quick C? Can you use an editor you like better with Turbo Pascal? On the Amiga, you pick an editor _you_ like best, and use it. You use it to do things while you are programming, while you are on line, while you are doing whatever else you care to do. If the editor is capable of speaking ARexx, as are CEDPro and TxEd, you can even integrate it with your favourite compiler, or assembler, or all your favourite compilers or assemblers. You can use it to build other tools, with or without the help of your favourite programs. >My only problem is that it is too simple, I fully expect to either >1) explain why this is significant, or 2) leave the fellow fully >unimpressed. Any suggestions for other similar "thought experiments"? >(Ideally something that leaves someone walking away saying: > "Hmmmm, I thought my machine multitasked, but it can't > do that. I wonder how the Amiga does that?" Because IBM has not yet started fuly pushing multitasking (via OS/2), most IBM users are of the opinion that it can't be important. When IBM does finally push it, they will start preaching its virtues to others. Such is the nature of IBM and their loyal users. Historically, IBM has always released products well after the demand has been there. Before release, their salesmen (and consequently, their customers), will tell you that it is not needed. Virtual Memory, colour terminals, and many more advances only became desirable in large DP shops after IBM put their 'blessing' on them. Currently, the micro market is going through the same things that the mainframe IBM shops went through years ago. The attempts to provide functionality are there, in the form of TSRs, addon kludges in large applications, and OS/2 itself. These in themselves should be sufficient to convince IBM users that they are heading in specifics toward what the Amiga does in generalities. Unfortunately, most MsDos users you talk to have the blinders on, and many cannot be convinced. That these same people will be singing the praises of multitasking a few years down the road is not much comfort. If you manage to convince _ANY_ MsDos users of the benefits to be had in the Amiga, consider yourself as having done A Good Thing. You won't convince them all, for the simple reason that IBM does not sell the equivalent of an Amiga. >Sorry for rambling, but it is late. Ha! And you thought you rambled. Well, it's early, and I think it had to be said. -larry -- Frisbeetarianism: The belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca or uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
murphy@pur-phy (William J. Murphy) (02/12/89)
There are/is multitasking available within MSDOS, but only in a limited way through the use of something like Windows 386 or Desqview 386. However, you must have a well behaved program to use these programs. I have written some code to do a graphics simlulation of coupled oscillators both on the IBM and the Amiga, Which one do you think worked better? The Amiga! Since my code wrote to the screen with the graphis library in MSC5.1 and Borland's Turbo Pascal5.0, It broke under both Desqview and Windows 386. TO FIX it, I will have to buy the Application Programmer's Interface for one or the other windowing interface. I hate to feel as though MSDOS was one big mistake, but why should someone have to spend ~$600 just to get multitasking and graphics? Vive Le Amiga!! To me the biggest plus to the Amiga is the built in libraries for Intuition Graphics, Exec, ... A programmer should not have to spend major $$$ to get access to hooks in an operating system or windowing package (ala OS/2 and Windows and Desqview). Oh well, This is not meant to start a flame war, I'm just ticked that my research is locked into a PC based lab which requires me to use MSDOS. Bill Murphy
duncan@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Shan D Duncan) (02/12/89)
In article <603NETOPRHM@NCSUVM> NETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks) writes: >I think the best example is using AREXX. A simple example would be how >VLT and TxEd+ are able to work together. Two programs, running concurrently >that are able to pass data back and forth to one another. > I was impressed by vlt + arexx + editor to simulate a interactive command line for those who do not have something like tcsh. Using the editor to composes commands which are sent out over the modem every time the return key is hit but not before. Neat!
jac423@leah.Albany.Edu (Julius Cisek) (02/13/89)
In article <603NETOPRHM@NCSUVM>, NETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks) writes: > I think the best example is using AREXX. A simple example would be how > VLT and TxEd+ are able to work together. Two programs, running concurrently > that are able to pass data back and forth to one another. > > I know that the Mac cannot do this. The PC might, but I cannot think of > any specific examples at the moment. > > This is the best example of a "real world" use for multitasking I can > think of at the moment. I'm sure that there are others. I disagree. A true test of multi-tasking is two programs that run completely apart from each other. The Atari ST can do what you described easily with accessories and main programs, yet it is certainly not multi-tasking. I'm pretty sure that the Mac can also do this with its accessories. -- //Another Julius Andrew Cisek jac423@leah.albany.edu \X/ Amiga Box 199, 325 Western Ave. jac423@rachel.albany.edu Maniac Albany, NY 12203 spcfan@ai.ai.mit.edu
pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) (02/13/89)
On my Amiga, I never have to stop what I am doing in order to format disks.
On the AT&T PC at work, formatting and backups generally mean wasted time.
Of course, I can pop up something, but the format stops while whatever is
on the screen. Only Amiga... :-)
--
Phil Nelson at (but not speaking for) OnTyme:NSC.P/Nelson
Tymnet, McDonnell Douglas Network Systems Company Voice:408-922-7508
UUCP:{pyramid|ames}oliveb!tymix!pnelson LRV:Component Station
"ding ding..." -Santa Clara County Transit Company trolley car (AKA "LRV")usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (02/14/89)
In article <386@antares.UUCP> pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) writes: >On my Amiga, I never have to stop what I am doing in order to format disks. >On the AT&T PC at work, formatting and backups generally mean wasted time. You can also format as many floppies as you have drives on the Amiga. I have done this when I needed to format a bunch on floppies at once. It is fast than one at a time, but not twice as fast, since the disk controller is not multitasking :-( porkka@frith.egr.msu.edu
cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (02/14/89)
In article <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM> jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: >What is the simplest example you can think of to demonstrate that >the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be >in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't >require a computer to be present. Run an NFS server process on it. You know, the whole shebang so that you can mount the Amiga harddisk over the net while still using it for stuff like compiling, running shanghai etc. Really a weird concept to people around Sun who aren't familar with the Amiga. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
dooley@helios.toronto.edu (Kevin Dooley) (02/14/89)
In article <2225@van-bc.UUCP> lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) writes: >In <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: > >What is the simplest example you can think of to demonstrate that > >the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be > >in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't > >require a computer to be present. > >The problem with this tack is that the MsDos type will usually say things like >"Yes, I can do that because my terminal program (or editor, or whatever) allows >me to do a dir (or delete or print, or whatever)." If it is something not >covered by the program they are discussing, they will say "I can do that with a >TSR program called 'blah'." > There are better examples of multitasking. For example, no TSR program can allow me to do a ray tracing in the background while I call up my favorite USENET node to read the news. Perhaps more importantly, there is no way any MS-Dos hack can allow me to run 2 seperate number crunches simultaneously while I edit my source code for the next run. (Especially not on 640K!) I often do this because I like to use my Amiga as a real computer to do real physics with. No Mic or clone can touch the Amiga for doing real computations for this very reason. This may not be terribly important to Joe Average User, but perhaps that is why Joe Average User bought a clone in the first place. ':^) I'm sorry, I digress. Mr. Phillips makes some very good points about everything being automatically an integrated environment. This also is very important. I like the fact that when I bought DpaintII, I could have it running at the same time as ProWrite to draw my diagrams without leaving my word processor because it means that I can change the text and change the diagram correspondingly with a minimum of pain. I like the fact that I can have a game of asteroids while I'm printing out some long piece of text or waiting for something to download. I especially like the fact that when I have a 10 hour number crunch running, I can still use my computer. Kevin Dooley -- Kevin Dooley UUCP - {uunet,pyramid}!utai!helios.physics!dooley Physics Dept. BITNET - dooley@utorphys U. of Toronto INTERNET - dooley@helios.physics.utoronto.ca
iphwk%MTSUNIX1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Bill Kinnersley) (02/14/89)
In <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes:
)What is the simplest example you can think of to demonstrate that
)the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be
)in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't
)require a computer to be present.
In simplest terms, Jim, did you ever consider what it would be like
to be married to two women? Well that's multitasking.
--
--Bill Kinnersley
Physics Department Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717
INTERNET: iphwk@terra.oscs.montana.edu BITNET: IPHWK@MTSUNIX1
221 Goodbye.cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (02/14/89)
Basically, there is no way to convince someone that doesn't have a
multitasking machine that multitasking is the neatest thing since
sliced bread. If you have been involved with microcomputers for any
length of time you will know that the *exact* same thing happened with
hard disks. Simply put, many otherwise intelligent people refused to
believe that it was more convienient to have a hard disk full of stuff
than it was to have several floppies, each with it's contents nicely
separated from the others. No need to scan through long directory listings
for a specific file, just pop in the floppy. No need to worry about
running out of space, just buy somemore floppies. Etc, etc, etc.
Now however, lots of folks can't live without a hard disk.
I expect multitasking will evolve in much the same way. People will get
it and use it just like they used hard disks originally, like a giant
floppy. Run a program, exit, run another. After a while they will do
something that they couldn't do before, nor even thought of doing before
and the light will go on. Poof, converted for life.
--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.rminnich@super.ORG (Ronald G Minnich) (02/14/89)
In article <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM> jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: >Anyway, the point here is to come up with a quick, thoughtful, >expression of Amiga uniqueness wrt multitasking. Multiple windows >isn't it, nor is "multi processing" since some machines can emulate heck, i think it is simple. Real multitasking means i can start up as many copies of ProWrite, or TeX, or whatever, as i want. Most of those pseudo-multitasking kludges won't let you start up more than one copy of any program (is this still true of MultiFinder?) because they walk all over themselves. I do know of one project that got totally screwed because of this very limitation in Microsoft Windows. And i do know some mac junkies who argue that the MultiFinder limitation is a feature (!). And of course there was the bozo in Computer Shopper who argued that multitasking did not mean running a game and a word processor at the same time. People finally admit multitasking is good, they don't want to admit their machine doesn't really have it, so they make things up. Back to the emotional level ... ron
davidb@utpsych.toronto.edu (David Brodbeck) (02/14/89)
The best example I can think of actually happened to me last year. I was
printing out my Thesis in Scribble! and playing The Hunt For Red October. I
know its a little frivolous, but hey It was also cool.
Dave Brodbeck - davidb@psych.toronto.edu
"I can't beleive the news today,
I can't smile and make it go away"
U@
(U2 actually!)chas@gtss.gatech.edu (Charles Cleveland) (02/14/89)
Multitasking is great, but it shouldn't be necessary to resort to AREXX or TCP/IP server stuff to demonstrate clearly. So I thought, what about just using one of the process monitors, like SysMon (from ASDG, I think), or pm, or whatever? Especially the graphical ones, although some PC'ers might like a table generator instead, not being used to a 'graphical' interface ;-). Doesn't one of these maybe even come with 1.3? Just a minute while I check, using methods more or less easily simulated, but not duplicated, on an MSDOS machine.... Why yes, right here in the Tools directory of my "Extras 1.3" disk is something call PerfMon. It's just another program. It runs with every other piece of software that doesn't take over the machine. You can use it to show how two *other* pieces of software can *share* the CPU. And nothing like it has ever been dreamt of in the MSDOS world because it has no relevance there. The mere existence of such programs is a clear sign that the Amiga really multitasks. And all us UNIX folk take it so much for granted that we don't think to mention it. So. Do I win the prize? Or do the IBMers just say it can all be done with interrupts? I suspect it can. Perhaps it even is. But the real advantage of a multitasking operating system is that you don't have to do it; it gets done for you. You don't have to worry about whether your interrupts are compatible with some other programmer's, who is probably a real dickhead. You just get your turn. One other thing you could point out to them, which might floor an IBMer. If the CPU has no instructions to execute, the OS STOP's it, until there are. This clears the bus for the special purpose chips, or other 'peripherals'. How much work does a PC get done with its CPU turned off? It a way, this is the ultimate in multitasking, perhaps relating more to parallel processing instead. Which of course, brings to mind the 2000 and its capacity to simultaneously utilize the 80xx on the IBM side and the 680xx on the Amiga side. But I don't know enough about that to comment on it. But it's got to be a hell of a lot easier to do here than it is in an MSDOS box with a limited number or interrupts to work with, and with everyone having their own, possible ill-conceived and certainly not necessarily well-coordinated, ideas of how to use them. -- - It is better for civilization to be going down the drain than to be - - coming up it. -- Henry Allen - Charles Cleveland Georgia Tech School of Physics Atlanta, GA 30332-0430 UUCP: ...!gatech!gtss!chas INTERNET: chas@gtss.gatech.edu
sennett@s.cs.uiuc.edu (02/14/89)
I like to use music to demonstrate multi-tasking on the amiga. I'll start up Music Mouse and get a musical pattern going, then go and start up another program such as my editor and start typing. It also might be interesting to write a script that used a SMUS player to play a whole series of songs while you worked on other things. Sort of a computer-based radio... Someone mentioned VLT earlier in this notestring. Where can I get this program... I haven't seen it on the fish disks. sennett@s.cs.uiuc.edu
wilde@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Nick Wilde) (02/14/89)
>In <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes:
)the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be
)in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't
)require a computer to be present.
Load up your favorite term program. Call up the local mainframe
or BBS. Download a large file or upload that report you composed
at home and want printed on the laser printer. Gonna take awhile ?
Not to worry. Start editing a letter to Mom, playing a game, fooling
around with your spreadsheet, whatever.. Leave a window on the
upload/download in the corner so you can see whats happening..hrc@himalia.dk (Henrik Raeder Clausen) (02/14/89)
In article <603NETOPRHM@NCSUVM> NETOPRHM@NCSUVM.BITNET (Hal Meeks) writes: >I think the best example is using AREXX. A simple example would be how >VLT and TxEd+ are able to work together. Two programs, running concurrently >that are able to pass data back and forth to one another. >This is the best example of a "real world" use for multitasking I can >think of at the moment. I'm sure that there are others. > >--hal Yes, printing in the background. A friend of mine, Andreas Ramos - author of Y2M for Atari ST, had to print 450 pages of NLQ on his ST a few days ago. Afterwards, he was practically screaming for multitasking on our local BBS. Uh, I wouldn't dream of not having DMouse with a POPCLI ready. Best regards, Henrik Clausen, hrc@daimi.dk
page@swan.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) (02/14/89)
Forget about foreground vs background; any PC weenie with a hotkey program and some knowledge of TSR & interrupts can do that. Saying "it can be done easier on an Amiga" won't impress anyone. Many people miss one of the major points of multitasking, and that's having software modules communicate with each other via message passing (I'm not talking about AREXX). It makes for software that's very flexible (easy to replace one or more modules), expandable, and small ... you only use what you need, and you can share modules among different processes. However, I doubt the single-tasker's will care much about this either. You have to experience it to like it. I have a friend with an Atari ST who uses it for music. He's got the Dr.T's package, which has a "Multi-Program Environment" ... lets you load and run different packages at the same time, like load your compositional tool and a couple of patch editors while your sequencer is running, and they can all talk to each other. He thinks its great, and one day said to me "even the Amiga doesn't have MPE!". I told him it really did have it, just that Commodore/Amiga bundles it in with every Amiga sold, and it works on more than just the Dr. T's stuff. ..Bob -- Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept. page@swan.ulowell.edu ulowell!page Have five nice days.
joe@dayton.UUCP (Joseph P. Larson) (02/15/89)
In article <89581@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: >I expect multitasking will evolve in much the same way. People will get >it and use it just like they used hard disks originally, like a giant >floppy. Run a program, exit, run another. After a while they will do >something that they couldn't do before, nor even thought of doing before >and the light will go on. Poof, converted for life. I suspect the majority of netters out there started out computing on mainframes or super-minis or someothing. Probably a lot of DEC Vax and PDP-11 expertise out there. And we all have our Unix boxes. All these are multi-tasking machines. However, I still get the biggest kick out of the Amiga that is currently sitting behind me, compiling a program. I have one window in the editor, another in the CLI. And sometimes I have one more running vt100 or asteriods or something (if I'm at home). And every time I do this, I just stop and look and bounce around windows awhile and say "Wow...." Something about all that power sitting in a little window on your desk. -Joe -- When you fall on your head do you land on your feet? UUCP: rutgers!dayton!joe (Feed my Dayton Hudson Department Store Company ATT : (612) 375-3537 picture Joe Larson/MIS 1060 (standard disclaimer...) collection) 700 on the Mall Mpls, Mn. 55402
hugh@censor.UUCP (Hugh D. Gamble) (02/15/89)
In article <5906@super.ORG>, rminnich@super.ORG (Ronald G Minnich) writes: ... > heck, i think it is simple. Real multitasking means i can start up > as many copies of ProWrite, or TeX, or whatever, as i want. ... Careful here, a lot of applications can't be run as multiple copies at once. > very limitation in Microsoft Windows. And i do know some mac junkies > who argue that the MultiFinder limitation is a feature (!). ... Well for some of the ones on the Amiga it *is* a feature. If the application can handle multiple documents/sessions/??? at once, having multiple copies of the executable in RAM can just hog unnecessary memory. Other times it's a case of the application grabbing exclusive rights to a resource so a second copy can't get it, or a dumber bug. > ron P.S. I find the limitations of multifinder *very* frustrating, that's only one reason why the Amy is the computer for the rest of me :^) A/UX is getting better though. My fingers are itching for Amix.
cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (02/15/89)
In article <89581@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: >I expect multitasking will evolve in much the same way. People will get >it and use it just like they used hard disks originally, like a giant >floppy. Run a program, exit, run another. After a while they will do >something that they couldn't do before, nor even thought of doing before >and the light will go on. Poof, converted for life. In article <6405@dayton.UUCP> joe@dayton.UUCP (Joseph P. Larson) replies: >I suspect the majority of netters out there started out computing on >mainframes or super-minis or someothing. Probably a lot of DEC Vax and >PDP-11 expertise out there. And we all have our Unix boxes. All these >are multi-tasking machines. Ahh, but it is the wrong kind of multitasking! All of those "early" computer users used terminals. And terminals impose a sort of serial mentality on you, run the compiler, run the editor, run the compiler, run the editor. UNIX has some spiffy job control, but how many people _really_ use it? When you start to see the power of multitasking on a personal scale is when you can push a window to the back and bring up another application, even running them side by side exchanging data. The other incorrect assumption is that "netters" are a majority or even a significant fraction of the Amiga customer base. Even if *every* estimated reader of this group owned an Amiga we'd still make up less than 10% of the installed base. Believe me, when Jerry Pournelle says he can't live without multitasking you can be sure that it has "arrived." --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) (02/15/89)
A simple way to show multitasking would be to get some Sonix song. Play it and use your terminal program to call up your favorite bbs. thyss@cup.portal.com
Sullivan@cup.portal.com (sullivan - segall) (02/15/89)
>In article <386@antares.UUCP> pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) writes: >>On my Amiga, I never have to stop what I am doing in order to format disks. >>On the AT&T PC at work, formatting and backups generally mean wasted time. >You can also format as many floppies as you >have drives on the Amiga. I have done this when I needed to format >a bunch on floppies at once. It is fast than one at a time, >but not twice as fast, since the disk controller is not multitasking :-( Of course the disk controller is multitasking. (It isn't multiprocessing, because after all, there is only one piece of hardware. But there is also only one cpu, one blitter, one copper, ...) btw: The Amiga doesn't really have a disk controller. It uses the blitter to encode and decode MFM directly from the disk. So you really can't do blitter based anims and format your floppies at the same time. But the point of multitasking is that every task gets to share the hardware. And you will notice that when formatting two floppies, the drive select line flips back and forth between the two drives. (On the Commodore supplied floppy drives, the light won't go out since it is driven as an OR of the drive select and drive ready lines. (Should I tell you about my kludge for installing a 3.5" floppy drive without any special hardware?) -Sullivan Segall _____________________________________________________________ /V\ Sully set the example: to fly without moving. We shall ' learn to soar on wings of thought. And the student will surpass the teacher. To Quote the immortal Socrates: "I drank what?" -Sullivan _____________________________________________________________ Mail to: ...sun!portal!cup.portal.com!Sullivan or Sullivan@cup.portal.com
kevin@uts.amdahl.com (Kevin Clague) (02/15/89)
I do a LOT of fractal calculations on my Amiga. Many of the pictures
take hours (if not days) to calculate. I often start a picture
generating, and then start making changes to the program I'm
running, recompile and run it again. So I'm editing, compiling and
testing while my Mandelbrot pictures are generating. Does this
qualify as a good multitasking example?
Kevin
--
UUCP: kevin@uts.amdahl.com
or: {sun,decwrl,hplabs,pyramid,seismo,oliveb}!amdahl!kevin
DDD: 408-737-5481
USPS: Amdahl Corp. M/S 249, 1250 E. Arques Av, Sunnyvale, CA 94086
[ Any thoughts or opinions which may or may not have been expressed ]
[ herein are my own. They are not necessarily those of my employer. ]waynet@mongo.uucp (Wayne Thompson) (02/15/89)
In article <8662@louie.udel.EDU> iphwk%MTSUNIX1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Bill Kinnersley) writes: In <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: )What is the simplest example you can think of to demonstrate that )the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be )in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't )require a computer to be present. In simplest terms, Jim, did you ever consider what it would be like to be married to two women? Well that's multitasking. Nah, that's time-sharing ;-) Wayne
disd@hubcap.UUCP (Gary Heffelfinger) (02/16/89)
From article <00cVb5cbN81010DYua.@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>, by kevin@uts.amdahl.com (Kevin Clague): > I do a LOT of fractal calculations on my Amiga. Many of the pictures > take hours (if not days) to calculate. I often start a picture > generating, and then start making changes to the program I'm > running, recompile and run it again. So I'm editing, compiling and > testing while my Mandelbrot pictures are generating. Does this > qualify as a good multitasking example? Ouch! It strikes me a as a dangerous one. You must be a better programmer than I. I would never dream of testing one of my programs while I had a Mandelbrot picture going. All it takes is one misplaced pointer and your 8 hour picture is toast. I *will* however play a game of Tetrix, or write a letter, or run a download, or use some other time-tested program, while generating a Mandelbrot picture. Gary -- Gary R Heffelfinger - Not speaking for Clemson University disd@hubcap.clemson.edu -- FIX the Holodeck -- Furman Paladins --- National Champs!!
jms@antares.UUCP (Joe Smith) (02/16/89)
I ran into one effective demo of multitasking by accident. While showing
off to some friends, I started up an early version of Tomas Rokicki's LIFE
program. You know, the one that can only be stopped by putting the mouse
in the middle of the left edge of the screen. Well, I didn't know how to
stop it a the time, so I just left it and started something else. Several
demos later, I pulled down the front screen and there was LIFE, and obviously
compute bound process still running while the Speech Demo was talking and
the CLI was LISTing.
--
Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | jms@antares.Tymnet.COM or jms@opus.Tymnet.COM
McDonnell Douglas FSCO | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!antares!jms
PO Box 49019, MS-D21 | PDP-10:JMS@F74.Tymnet.COM CA license plate:"POPJ P,"
San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | narrator.device: "I didn't say that, my Amiga did!"higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (Paul Higginbottom MKT) (02/16/89)
In article <89751@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes:
$...When you start to see the power of multitasking on
$a personal scale is when you can push a window to the back and bring
$up another application, even running them side by side exchanging
$data.
This can be done with Microsoft Windows under MS-DOS, unless you mean
that the programs are actually all doing something instead of being
idle, such as the dots/lines demos, etc.
It's important to note the following:
1. A USER CAN ONLY BE INTERACTING WITH ONE PROGRAM AT A TIME.
(Guess we could have multiple mice, or disconnected input streams -
keystrokes go to this program, mouse clicks to that,
ugh, how many people can juggle well?)
2. MOST APPLICATIONS ARE IDLE UNLESS THE USER IS INTERACTING WITH IT.
We type a key, click the mouse, etc, and the program does a bit of work
and then goes to sleep again. Exceptions are rendering, file transfer, etc.
3. "SWITCHING" BETWEEN PROGRAMS IS USEFUL BECAUSE IT ALLOWS THE USER TO
STOP 'INTERACTING' WITH ONE PROGRAM AND START INTERACTING WITH ANOTHER.
We all use this capability to format disks while the wordprocessor is still
loaded, to pop up a cli to change or create an assignment before clicking
RETRY on a System Requester, etc.
So it would seem that switching is useful for most situations, but
multi-tasking becomes useful when there is a need to run programs other
than the program the user is interacting with that don't require interaction
(e.g rendering). Let's face it, spell-checking a large document (which requires
interaction), and entering data into a database at the same time is not really
useful.
I'd like to know what's wrong with this argument. For example, I am
right now, running a terminal program in my office here at Commodore on my
Amiga. On the Workbench I have a word processor and a desktop publishing
program running also. This is SLICK, but (and I hate to admit it) I've
done similar things on Microsoft Windows. The ONLY difference is when I
start an xmodem transfer and then click the screen to the back and continue
working on another application. This is GREAT, but not necessarily a
mainstream application.
Please don't start a war on this subject, I'm just trying to look at the
way switching, single-tasking, and multi-tasking can be used and which offers
what benefits. Technically, there's no question the Amiga is GREAT, and as
netters, we probably all use the things I've talked about but the trick is
to explain it as a benefit to a wider audience. One GREAT use of multi-tasking
potentially though, is sound and video TOGETHER. Not what your average office
worker wants again, but definitely marketable.
$Believe me, when Jerry Pournelle
$says he can't live without multitasking you can be sure that it has
$"arrived."
I agree!
Paul.mgardi@watdcsu.waterloo.edu (M.Gardi - ICR) (02/17/89)
Normally, I take the multitasking of the Amiga for granted. One time, I was un-Zooing an archive file and it asked me if I wanted to overwrite an existing "ReadMe" file. Not knowing what the previous file contained, I started a new CLI; typed the file; then copied to another file name because it was important. I then wentack to Zoo and told it to overwrite "ReadMe". A couple of days later and the same thing happens at work on my PS/2 Model 60. My only alternative was to skip the file, then restart Zoo just to extract the ReadMe file. Normally that's not too much bother, but it just goes to show you the fundamental difference. PS. I've got the official release of OS/2 PM 1.1 and SideKick for presentation manager. It's running on the 60 with 80 Meg of disk, 3 megs of Ram and it was auto-installed. The calendar function of SK is pretty neat, but it takes 1 minute and 10 seconds to start from the time I click on it's name. Give me a break.
jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) (02/17/89)
In article <5988@cbmvax.UUCP> higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (Paul Higginbottom MKT) writes: }In article <89751@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: }$Believe me, when Jerry Pournelle }$says he can't live without multitasking you can be sure that it has }$"arrived." } }I agree! No, when Jerry Pournelle says he can't live without multitasking, you can be sure that its time has come and gone.
simon@cheshire (Thor Simon) (02/17/89)
As far as the formatting-two-disks idea goes, I have to say I think it's a bad idea. I used to do this all the time, until I realised it took _longer_
rminnich@super.ORG (Ronald G Minnich) (02/18/89)
In article <5988@cbmvax.UUCP> higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (Paul Higginbottom MKT) writes: >2. MOST APPLICATIONS ARE IDLE UNLESS THE USER IS INTERACTING WITH IT. >We type a key, click the mouse, etc, and the program does a bit of work >and then goes to sleep again. Exceptions are rendering, file transfer, etc. well, i am an exception to your case, paul. I often have compiles running at home on the amiga and at work on the suns. I share my cycles; while i wait for compiles to finish on the sun, i work on the amiga, and vice-versa. I have a pile of dnet windows, so if i am waiting for both i read news. BTW you can also substitute latex for the compiles in the above. Lots of things i use are anything but idle when i am not interacting with them. MS windows does not meet my requirements, to say the least. ron
pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) (02/18/89)
In article <14659@cup.portal.com> Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) writes: >A simple way to show multitasking would be to get some Sonix song. Play >it and use your terminal program to call up your favorite bbs. > This was one of the first things I tried after buying Sonix, unfortunately Sonix wanted the serial port (for MIDI, I presume) and so it grabbed it, whether or not it was already in use (by whatever comm program I was using back then). When I complained about this to Aegis, they said they would get back to me. I am still waiting. Does anyone know if they ever fixed this? >thyss@cup.portal.com -- Phil Nelson at (but not speaking for) OnTyme:NSC.P/Nelson Tymnet, McDonnell Douglas Network Systems Company Voice:408-922-7508 UUCP:{pyramid|ames}oliveb!tymix!pnelson LRV:Component Station "ding ding..." -Santa Clara County Transit Company trolley car (AKA "LRV")
jms@antares.UUCP (Joe Smith) (02/18/89)
In article <393@antares.UUCP> pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) writes: :In article <14659@cup.portal.com: Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) writes: :>A simple way to show multitasking would be to get some Sonix song. Play :>it and use your terminal program to call up your favorite bbs. : :This was one of the first things I tried after buying Sonix, unfortunately :Sonix wanted the serial port (for MIDI, I presume) and so it grabbed it, :whether or not it was already in use (by whatever comm program I was using :back then). When I complained about this to Aegis, they said they would get :back to me. I am still waiting. It's even worse. Sonix 2.0 toggles DTR. If DTR was off before you run Sonix, it turns DTR on. If a comm program had DTR on, Sonix turns it OFF! Since Vt100 had the serial device open, Sonix must have gone straight to the hardware when it toggled the bit. I was making sure this phenomenon was reproducable using just those 2 programs, Sonix and Vt100 2.8A, (and a NEWCLI) when I tried exiting Vt100 after DTR had been stolen from it. GURU 81000005.00C0C33E Corrupted memory list. -- Joe Smith (408)922-6220 | jms@antares.Tymnet.COM or jms@opus.Tymnet.COM McDonnell Douglas FSCO | UUCP: ...!{ames,pyramid}!oliveb!tymix!antares!jms PO Box 49019, MS-D21 | PDP-10:JMS@F74.Tymnet.COM CA license plate:"POPJ P," San Jose, CA 95161-9019 | narrator.device: "I didn't say that, my Amiga did!"
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (02/18/89)
In article <33627@mongo.uucp> waynet@mongo.uucp (Wayne Thompson) writes: > In article <8662@louie.udel.EDU> iphwk%MTSUNIX1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Bill Kinnersley) writes: > In simplest terms, Jim, did you ever consider what it would be like > to be married to two women? Well that's multitasking. > > Nah, that's time-sharing ;-) > > Wayne I all depends on how you manage the situation! ;-) ;-) -- Tom Limoncelli -- tlimonce@drunivac.Bitnet -- limonce@pilot.njin.net Drew University -- Madison, NJ -- 201-408-5389 Standard ACM Regional Contest winner! See you at Disclaim the nationals in Louisville, KY on Feb 21-23! er.
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (02/20/89)
In article <6168@columbia.edu> simon@cheshire.UUCP (Thor Simon) writes: > > As far as the formatting-two-disks idea goes, I have to say I think it's a bad idea. I used to do this all the time, until I realised it took _longer_ I *timed* it with a stop watch. I dont remember the exact timings, but I know that it took longer to format two at a time than one at a time, but it was less than twice as long giving a net savings of some number of seconds
chas@gtss.gatech.edu (Charles Cleveland) (02/20/89)
In article <6168@columbia.edu> simon@cheshire.UUCP (Thor Simon) writes:
)
) As far as the formatting-two-disks idea goes, I have to say I think it's
) a bad idea. I used to do this all the time, until I realised it took
) _longer_
Odd. I just ran this script from ram: (1.3 format):
ram:echo starting two sequential copies
ram:date
ram:format <NIL: drive df0: name empty noicons
ram:format <NIL: drive df1: name empty noicons
ram:date
ram:echo starting two simultaneous copies
ram:run <NIL: ram:format drive df0: name empty noicons
ram:run <NIL: ram:format drive df1: name empty noicons
The times between the first two dates way 3:26. The time from hitting return
to start things up until the last drive light went out was 6:09. Thus the
time taken for the two sequential formats way 3:26 and everything else,
*including* the reformatting of both disks 'simultaneously' was 2:43.
By the way, its neat to do this and watch the drives as they compete for the
blitter. They tend to synchronize (or should I say anti-synchronize) as a
consequence, alternating drives as the formats alternate between 'format'
and 'verify'. Somehow I don't think this would work as well when formatting
more than 2 disks at the same time.
--
- It is better for civilization to be going down the drain than to be -
- coming up it. -- Henry Allen -
Charles Cleveland Georgia Tech School of Physics Atlanta, GA 30332-0430
UUCP: ...!gatech!gtss!chas INTERNET: chas@gtss.gatech.edumike@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Mike Smithwick) (02/21/89)
[]
When it comes to multitasking, "the average user" will likely not be running
more than one major task at the same time such as DPaint and WordPerfect.
The real beauty of multitasking is the ease in extending the original OS via
things like FACC, DMouse, GOMF, etc. People will likely be working with one
major package, while running a bunch of the little guys in the background.
Not flashy, but very useful. The PeeCee user should be able to grasp the
utility of this when compared to SideKick, except that the little
utilities in general don't need to muck around with the OS internals, and
or course are constantly running, checking on things invisible to the
user.
For a more dramatic example, one might demonstrate generating a Hi-Res
dithered Sculpt image for several hours, while still having use of the
machine for other chores.
mike
--
*** mike (cerbral GURU, insert M&Ms to restart) smithwick***
"The great thing about standards is that there are so many of them!"
[disclaimer : nope, I don't work for NASA, I take full blame for my ideas]rroot@edm.UUCP (Stephen Samuel) (02/21/89)
From article <2225@van-bc.UUCP>, by lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips): > In <3031@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: > >What is the simplest example you can think of to demonstrate that > >the Amiga really does have multitasking? Preferably this should be > >in the form of a discussion like "can you do this?" that wouldn't > >require a computer to be present. > Although this was actually on a windowed UNX box, I think it applies: I was writing a program that called TAR and DU to get an estimate of whether or not there was room to append another set of backups to the current tape. I had one window open to call tar and show the output. one window with my editor running one that I used to test the program (so I could pause the debug output at various points and have it on screen while I edited). and a fourth window to do various other random things. Then somebody from the general office (they only have IBMs) showed up and found my (rather cluttered screen) interesting, so I tried to show off some random windowing features (including pushing and popping windows). all of a sudden she goes: "Oh, that IS a clock up in the corner" (it had a working second hand). If I'd have been thinking, I would have resized the window to fill most of the screen (when I do that, the machine ticks). -- ------------- Stephen Samuel Disclaimer: You betcha! {ihnp4,ubc-vision,seismo!mnetor,vax135}!alberta!edm!steve BITNET: USERZXCV@UQV-MTS
C506634@umcvmb.missouri.edu (Eric Edwards) (02/22/89)
I think whoever mentioned running a big number crucher in the background hit it
right on the head. In fact MS-DOS users DO run big number crunchers. They're
called spreadsheets. Large databases also have this effect although they're
not technicly number crunchers. Another is large accounting systems. These
all have the characteristic of taking large amounts of time without user
intervention. Why do you think their is such a demand (other than status) for
Faster and Faster 386 machines to run MS-DOS? If they could still use their
machine while it was crunching away the "Need for Speed" would not be so great.
_____________________________________________________
_______||*|================================================|____
||*|===|Eric Edwards BITNET: C506634@UMCVMB |===|
| | INTERNET: C506634@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU | |
| | HELLnet: C170154@umcecn01 |
| ----------------------------------------------------= |
| " If you are very good in Hell they will let you use the vax |
| but network mail is a privliged operation" |
| " OH MY GOD! I died and transfered to HELL!" " |
---------------------------------------------------------------=scotty@ziggy.UUCP (Scott Drysdale) (02/22/89)
In article <393@antares.UUCP> pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) writes: >In article <14659@cup.portal.com> Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) writes: >>A simple way to show multitasking would be to get some Sonix song. Play >>it and use your terminal program to call up your favorite bbs. > >This was one of the first things I tried after buying Sonix, unfortunately >Sonix wanted the serial port (for MIDI, I presume) and so it grabbed it, >whether or not it was already in use (by whatever comm program I was using >back then). When I complained about this to Aegis, they said they would get >back to me. I am still waiting. > >Does anyone know if they ever fixed this? i don't think they've fixed it. the original "sonix" (musicraft) didn't do this, and they suggested deleting midi.kybd from the miscellaneous directory. of course, that didn't seem to change anything. i have noticed that you can use a modem at 300 baud and it'll work - maybe the problem is simply the phenomenal number of interrupts sonix is generating while it operates, and not that they are actually stealing the serial port. i'll have to try it again and pay attention to what happens. this was over a year ago. another sonix question - about 6 months ago on bix i asked the aegis folks (in their conference) if there were any future plans for sonix (ie, more useful score editing, soundscape module, etc). they seemed to indicate that there were ideas, but no plans. can anyone with bix access see what the current story is? >>thyss@cup.portal.com >Phil Nelson at (but not speaking for) OnTyme:NSC.P/Nelson >Tymnet, McDonnell Douglas Network Systems Company Voice:408-922-7508 >UUCP:{pyramid|ames}oliveb!tymix!pnelson LRV:Component Station >"ding ding..." -Santa Clara County Transit Company trolley car (AKA "LRV") --Scotty
kpmancus@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Keith P. Mancus) (02/23/89)
I routinely have several windows up on a Sun 3/60. Several
are logins to different machines, mostly so people on those machines
can send me messages. One is a clock, one has an editor (vi), and
one is my cc/lint window. I routinely edit and compile simultaneously.
I'd do it on my Amiga too if I had > 512K and a hard drive. (I
actualy have 512K and 1 floppy. :-( )
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
-Keith Mancus <kpmancus@phoenix.princeton.edu> <- preferred
<kpmancus@pucc.BITNET>Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) (02/24/89)
In article <393@antares.UUCP> pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) writes: >In article <14659@cup.portal.com> Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) writes >>A simple way to show multitasking is to get some sonix song. Play >>it and use your terminal program to call up your favorite bbs. > >This was one of the first things I tried after buying Sonix, unfortunately >Sonix wanted the serial port (for MIDI, I presume) and so it grabbed it, >whether or not it was already in use (by whatever comm program I was using >back then). When I complained about this to Aegis, they said they would get >back to me. I am still waiting. > >Does anyone know if they ever fixed this? I don't think "they" ever fixed that, but several people have made programs that play Sonix songs. Two that I can think of right now are Mark Riley's Sonix Score Player and Peter Norman's AudioMasterII (will play IFF, Sonix, and Raw sound files). Mark Riley is on Bix:mriley and Plink:SONIX I'm not sure if AudioMasterII will play sonix .smus files, but I know Sonix Score Player will. thyss@cup.portal.com
jmsc@inesc.UUCP (Miguel Casteleiro) (02/25/89)
In article <393@antares.UUCP>, pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) writes: > In article<14659@cup.portal.com> Thyss@cup.portal.com (Brian TT Fudge) writes: > >A simple way to show multitasking would be to get some Sonix song. Play > >it and use your terminal program to call up your favorite bbs. > > This was one of the first things I tried after buying Sonix, unfortunately > Sonix wanted the serial port (for MIDI, I presume) and so it grabbed it, > whether or not it was already in use (by whatever comm program I was using > back then). When I complained about this to Aegis, they said they would get > back to me. I am still waiting. > > Does anyone know if they ever fixed this? Just move the file 'keyboard' out of the miscellaneous directory and Sonix will work fine with a modem connected at the serial port (I'm running Sonix in the background right now and reading this news). BTW, this is my favourite multitasking example (one that I can't do on Suns, MicroVaxes or whatever). -- Miguel Casteleiro at INESC, Lisboa, Portugal UUCP: ...!mcvax!inesc!jmsc "Life is hard and then you die."