hallett@macbeth.UUCP (09/01/87)
Organization:
I think I've just about had it with this Multifinder sham that Apple
is pulling on all of us. First off, it cost us $49 to get the thing.
Ok, they had distribution costs and all of that so that's ok.
However, now they say that it requires 2Meg! If that's not bad
enough, System 4.1 craps Switcher, leaving all of us without any
alternative except to get Multifinder. So really Mulitfinder costs
~$549 including the $500 to get a CMOS upgrade to 2Meg.
Personally, I think this sucks. I'm a heavy Mac user, but not a real
power user. For the vast, vast majority of things I do, 1Meg is
sufficient. Yeah, I want 2Meg someday, but can't do it now. However,
Apple is leaving me no choice if I want to keep my Switcher-like
environment (I like Switcher A LOT. As far as I am concerned, it is
the best piece of software Apple ever produced, and I use it quite
frequently.). As I see it, there are only a few alternatives:
1. Don't use System 4.1/Finder 5.5. This is unpleasant since the new
Finder has some nice features in it and System 4.1 has some Toolbox
enhancements that new programs (will) require.
2. Don't use Switcher. This is more unpleasant than using the old
System and Finder.
3. Buy a 2Meg upgrade. Great idea, except I think my wife would like
to eat more than watch me use Multifinder. This will eventually be
the solution.
For me, these alternative are unpleasant. I am not alone. What about
the poor slob college student (I'm one of those too, BTW) that uses
Switcher on his upgrade Mac+ that he gave up clothing and food for and
can't afford another Meg? He's stuck (or she's stuck) too.
I'm not suggesting that we revolt or anything, and I'm not really
blaming Apple. After all, this is how free enterprise works. You
introduce a product. Then, introduce a better one and make it as
inconvenient for the people to keep using the older, less expensive
one as possible, forcing them to upgrade. Maybe Apple should apply
their user-friendliness guidelines to their business and support as
well. It looks to me like Apple is taking the first step to shutting
out the Mac Plus users by upping the memory, speed and memory
management constraints (mostly satisfied by Mac II's now, I'll add).
Now, that I've made myself out to be a complete jerk in front of a lot
of people, I will say that normally, I don't complain about much.
Apple can placate me by simply fixing Switcher so I can use it. I
will gladly get Multifinder when I get my 2Meg (probably over the
winter when the cost of the CMOS upgrades get as cheap as the DRAM
ones). Until then, I want a tool I can use.
Well, this should initiate some good discussion. All I ask is that
people discuss what I've said and not attack me personally. It won't
do any good anyway.
Take care,
Jeff
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many"
-- Kirk (STIII)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~davec@mhuxu.UUCP (Dave Caswell) (09/02/87)
In article <7177@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, hallett@macbeth.UUCP writes: > However, now they say that it requires 2Meg! If that's not bad > enough, System 4.1 craps Switcher, leaving all of us without any > alternative except to get Multifinder. What is wrong with Switcher and the new system? I upgraded system's a while back and the first thing I do every day is to fire up Switcher with Versaterm, Word 3.01, MacDraw, and (sometimes) Excell. Every thing seems to operate just fine. Is there something waiting to get me when I least expect it? -- --->Dave Caswell {allegra|ihnp4|...}!mhuxu!davec Bones?
jww@sdcsvax.UUCP (09/02/87)
MultiFinder does not REQUIRE 2Meg. However, since the Mac Plus
programs have been getting bigger and bigger.
I'll bet you could put MacPaint and MacWrite on a 1Mb machine.
(Don't forget, with MultiFinder, the Finder is automatically
part of your Switcher-style partition set, so that's actually
three tasks.)
Face reality, dude. Keeping many programs in memory requires
more memory. We're all pissed that it costs so much, but
that's something that should change over time. It's never cheap
to be at the cutting edge of technology.
--
Joel West (c/o UCSD)
Palomar Software, Inc., P.O. Box 2635, Vista, CA 92083
{ucbvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!jww jww@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu
or ihnp4!crash!palomar!joel joel@palomar.cts.comt-jacobs@utah-cs.UUCP (Tony Jacobs) (09/02/87)
The multifinder leaves about 550k (depending on what you have in your system) around in a 1 meg Mac to run applications. You could then run 5 100k programs or 1 500k program. You won't be able to run Excel and Word 3.1 at the same time but then what would a poor student be doing with programs like that anyway?
john@felix.UUCP (John Gilbert) (09/02/87)
Somebody wrote.... >I think I've just about had it with this Multifinder sham that Apple >is pulling on all of us. First off, it cost us $49 to get the thing. >Ok, they had distribution costs and all of that so that's ok. >However, now they say that it requires 2Meg! If that's not bad >enough, System 4.1 craps Switcher, leaving all of us without any >alternative except to get Multifinder. So really Mulitfinder costs >~$549 including the $500 to get a CMOS upgrade to 2Meg. > >Personally, I think this sucks. I'm a heavy Mac user, but not a real >power user. For the vast, vast majority of things I do, 1Meg is >sufficient. Yeah, I want 2Meg someday, but can't do it now. However, >Apple is leaving me no choice if I want to keep my Switcher-like >environment (I like Switcher A LOT. As far as I am concerned, it is >the best piece of software Apple ever produced, and I use it quite >frequently.). As I see it, there are only a few alternatives: Them's pretty stiff words thar pardner. First of all, the tone of your text suggests you feel that Apple was deliberately trying to hose you over when they didn't need to, ar at least that they are trying to deceive you or con you into spending more money on Apple products. Since you agree that $49 for the Multifinder upgrade may not be unreasoable, it seems you are upset over hardware upgrade costs. At the $500 price you quote for the 2 meg expansion, I suspect you are not buying Apple. (BTW - that is the best price I have seen, is that a kit, off the shelf SIMM prices, or a low estimate? Seriously interested as I find myself in your shoes at the moment). Let's TRY to take the system developers point of view here for a minute. Let's PRETEND I sit around at some company (I do NOT work for apple, don't know anyone who does, and have NO vested interest in the company whatsoever!) and I am working on next-generation products. We have a list of features which are coinsidered very important, both to our users for improved computing environment, and also from our own competitive viewpoint. Some of these systems, like moving towards Multitasking, don't get done in a few hudred bytes of extra code. They will absolutely require that the system grow. They will also absolutely require use of previously unused but reserved system resources. In some cases, it may even require changing the rules a bit, putting existing products at risk. Now, basically it is next to impossible to proceed with such implimentation without introducing incompatabilities somehere in the system. We make every effort to keep those to a minimum, and generally the result is that most of the programs that break do so because they did non-standard things (i.e. don't assume that 4.1 BROKE Switcher ... maybe read it as Switcher doesn't work under 4.1). But I want to worry about such things and try to keep the annoyances to a minimum, our fault or not. So I look at the impact of such problems and alternatives. Generally, the number one alternative is that if the upgrade will indeed break someone's productive use of the system, they are NOT required to upgrade. This is your point number one below, and a relatively cheap one. The fact is you can keep on working. So you want all the new features in 4.1??? You DO have a CHOICE to make. If you were getting work done under 3.2 with switcher, stay there. Later, when you can afford the extra memory, move on. The industry trend is towards more memory. It is reasonable for companies to design toward that end, as long as they do not disable existing customers. Growth is important. >1. Don't use System 4.1/Finder 5.5. This is unpleasant since the new >Finder has some nice features in it and System 4.1 has some Toolbox >enhancements that new programs (will) require. > >2. Don't use Switcher. This is more unpleasant than using the old >System and Finder. > >3. Buy a 2Meg upgrade. Great idea, except I think my wife would like >to eat more than watch me use Multifinder. This will eventually be >the solution. > >For me, these alternative are unpleasant. I am not alone. What about >the poor slob college student (I'm one of those too, BTW) that uses >Switcher on his upgrade Mac+ that he gave up clothing and food for and >can't afford another Meg? He's stuck (or she's stuck) too. Unfortunately, this winds up being a case of "you can't have your cake and eat it too." It is not a case, however, of Apple suggesting "Let them eat cake". You CAN continute to work as you were with no problems. If you want to take advantage of new features, do yourself a favor and ANTICIPATE some cost. You are not "stuck". You have a "lesser of two evils" CHOICE. One of those choices leaves you no worse off than you were. And I am willing to bet that Apple considered this. >I'm not suggesting that we revolt or anything, and I'm not really >blaming Apple. After all, this is how free enterprise works. You >introduce a product. Then, introduce a better one and make it as >inconvenient for the people to keep using the older, less expensive >one as possible, forcing them to upgrade. Maybe Apple should apply >their user-friendliness guidelines to their business and support as >well. It looks to me like Apple is taking the first step to shutting >out the Mac Plus users by upping the memory, speed and memory >management constraints (mostly satisfied by Mac II's now, I'll add). Well, to me it SOUNDS like you are blaming Apple, by the end of the paragraph. I do not accept that the motivation at Apple was to > make it as >inconvenient for the people to keep using the older, less expensive >one as possible, forcing them to upgrade. In the first place, I think most people buy third party memory upgrades, and Apple won't benefit there. I don't want to revist the 64K ROM issue if that is what you mean. Another way to look at this is.... At least we have a growth path, and I know that my MacPlus will not forever stay limited to 1 megabyte while the rest of the world marches on. When the time comes and I am finally able to affor this, I will better off than with some hack that allowed me to plod alongmwith the constraints I had. What I did not hear in your article is what you thought they should do What would a better approach have been? >Now, that I've made myself out to be a complete jerk in front of a lot >of people, I will say that normally, I don't complain about much. >Apple can placate me by simply fixing Switcher so I can use it. I >will gladly get Multifinder when I get my 2Meg (probably over the >winter when the cost of the CMOS upgrades get as cheap as the DRAM >ones). Until then, I want a tool I can use. Whatever you were using six month's ago should still work. >Well, this should initiate some good discussion. All I ask is that >people discuss what I've said and not attack me personally. It won't >do any good anyway. This is not a personal attack. I do feel that you could try to look at this a different way, and not read bad intentions into what Apple has done. >Take care, > >Jeff > John Gilbert -- John Gilbert !trwrb!felix!john
wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (09/03/87)
As to the memory requirements of HyperCard: In my own experience, HC memory requirements only get larger as your user level gets higher. Just flitting between cards requires < 1M ; Turning on paint tools requires at little more and turning on paint tools, power keys, authoring, and scripting requires the most. It is in the latter that you begin to see the out of memory for painting message. Also, do you have HC 1.0 or HC 1.01? HC 1.01 is the official release, HC 1.0 is the almost officail release. For those of you with MultiFinder you can check HC's Memory use by watching the barchart in the about finder window change. Pierce Wetter God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board -- Mark Twain -------------------------------------------- wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu --------------------------------------------
duffy@ttidca.TTI.COM (David Duffy) (09/03/87)
In article <7177@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> hallett@macbeth.steinmetz () writes: > > [ Assorted stuff about Multifinder and Switcher ] > [ including a statement that Switcher does not work ] > [ under System 4.1 ] > What is it about Switcher that does not work under System 4.1??? I admit that I am neither a heavy user of Switcher nor a particularly sophisticated Switcher user, but I DO use it on my Mac Plus under 4.1 with no problems. Can someone offer me an explanation? Dave
goldman@apple.UUCP (Phil Goldman) (09/04/87)
In article <7177@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> hallett@macbeth.steinmetz () writes: > >I think I've just about had it with this Multifinder sham that Apple >is pulling on all of us. First off, it cost us $49 to get the thing. >Ok, they had distribution costs and all of that so that's ok. >However, now they say that it requires 2Meg! MultiFinder requires 1Meg, not 2. Although it will run on a 512kE, it is of limited use there -- but it is still very handy if you are using several small applications. >If that's not bad >enough, System 4.1 craps Switcher, leaving all of us without any >alternative except to get Multifinder. So really Mulitfinder costs >~$549 including the $500 to get a CMOS upgrade to 2Meg. > No! MultiFinder runs very comfortably in 1Meg. In fact, if you use a little common sense you can run more applications with MultiFinder than you can with Switcher. Right now on my (1Meg) MacPlus I am running MacDraw, MacProject, MacWrite, Word, WriteNow, and the Finder. Also, I have extra room left over to print or open desk accessories. >Personally, I think this sucks. I'm a heavy Mac user, but not a real >power user. For the vast, vast majority of things I do, 1Meg is >sufficient. Yeah, I want 2Meg someday, but can't do it now. However, >Apple is leaving me no choice if I want to keep my Switcher-like >environment (I like Switcher A LOT. As far as I am concerned, it is >the best piece of software Apple ever produced, and I use it quite >frequently.). As I see it, there are only a few alternatives: > Switcher was a great program, in its time. It was definitely better than the alternative (nothing). However, with the luxury of a year to work on a replacement, Apple has solved many of the problems that Switcher has: (1) User Interface. MultiFinder introduces the concept of layers, so that all the applications are onscreen at once. Switching between applications is much smoother and faster than rotating the screen. In fact, switching between windows in different layers is (seemingly) as fast as switching between those in the same layer. (2) Speed Launching an application is faster with MultiFinder than it was with either Switcher or with the old system. This is because resources shared by many applications, such as fonts, desk accessories, and packages (such as Standard File), are loaded into memory from the disk only once, not each time an application is launched. (3) Reliability Switcher has many bugs. Admittedly, much of this is due to the difficulty in trying to run "unfriendly" applications that just don't want to run in a shared environment. However, Switcher had its own problems too. For example, Switcher loads the Printing resources into the application's memory space when printing, which means that if the system print drivers get larger they will cause the application to run out of memory and crash. This has in fact already happened. Also, we've had time to fix humdreds of little bugs that were minor (or possibly major) annoyances with Switcher. (4) Added Features Multitasking MultiFinder will allow you to run applications in the background. We are including PrintMaster on the release disk, which lets you print in the background (a huge time savings). The latest VersaTerm will let you download files with a modem in the background. 4th dimension will do searching and sorting, as well as executing user task, all in the background. There are also many other products in the works that will have all kinds of background services: spreadsheets, databases, compilers, etc. Shutdown MultiFinder will automatically quit from all running applications when you shut down the machine, allowing you to save open document if necessary. Layers I know I mentioned this above, but I just wanted to add that using layers really makes the concept of cutting and pasting between applications really intuitive and covenient. >1. Don't use System 4.1/Finder 5.5. This is unpleasant since the new >Finder has some nice features in it and System 4.1 has some Toolbox >enhancements that new programs (will) require. > The newest Finder (6.0) has even more nice features in it (color icons, an interactive copy dialog, and greatly enhanced "Set Startup" option). >2. Don't use Switcher. This is more unpleasant than using the old >System and Finder. > >3. Buy a 2Meg upgrade. Great idea, except I think my wife would like >to eat more than watch me use Multifinder. This will eventually be >the solution. > Although MultiFinder will run in 1 Meg (or even 512k), it is twice as useful in 2Meg, just as Switcher would be. Therefore, it is really worth the $200 dollars (I'm sure a poor college student could find this kind of deal if he looked around a little) to double your memory. It's unfortunate that memory prices are so high, but talk to Ronnie about that one. >Now, that I've made myself out to be a complete jerk in front of a lot >of people, I will say that normally, I don't complain about much. >Apple can placate me by simply fixing Switcher so I can use it. I >will gladly get Multifinder when I get my 2Meg (probably over the >winter when the cost of the CMOS upgrades get as cheap as the DRAM >ones). Until then, I want a tool I can use. I think most of your confusion comes from unsubstantiated rumours (the 2 Meg stuff). When MultiFinder is actually released (in a couple more weeks) you'll get the chance to compare for yourself. I think you'll find that what has done is in fact to "fix the Switcher". - Phil Goldman, Apple Computer
daveb@geac.UUCP (Brown) (09/04/87)
In article <3779@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> jww@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU (Joel West) writes: >MultiFinder does not REQUIRE 2Meg.... >I'll bet you could put MacPaint and MacWrite on a 1Mb machine. I just tried it on a 1-meg machine, and got two Writes and the finder (desktop) chuntering along happily. Free space was diminishingly small... -- David Collier-Brown. {mnetor|yetti|utgpu}!geac!daveb Geac Computers International Inc., | Computer Science loses its 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, | memory (if not its mind) CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 | every 6 months.
lsr@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein) (09/04/87)
In article <7177@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> hallett@macbeth.steinmetz () writes: > >I think I've just about had it with this Multifinder sham that Apple >is pulling on all of us. First off, it cost us $49 to get the thing. >Ok, they had distribution costs and all of that so that's ok. >However, now they say that it requires 2Meg! If that's not bad >enough, System 4.1 craps Switcher, leaving all of us without any >alternative except to get Multifinder. So really Mulitfinder costs >~$549 including the $500 to get a CMOS upgrade to 2Meg. Multifinder does not require 2Mb. I am using it now on a 1Mb Mac Plus. 136K allocated to MacTerminal, 160K to Finder, 355K to the System, with 373K to run something else. Multifinder should be equivalent (memory-wise) to running Switcher with the Finder in one partition. One important advantage of Multifinder is that you can give the Finder only 160K and it can still get more memory (eg, for disk copies) from Multifinder as needed. I suppose that you could use one of the other Finder-substitutes that might require less than 160K, and free up more memory that way. >(I like Switcher A LOT. As far as I am concerned, it is >the best piece of software Apple ever produced, and I use it quite >frequently.). As I see it, there are only a few alternatives: I never used Switcher at all because there was too much overhead in using it. On the other hand, I am using Multifinder on all my machines (2 Mac Pluses, and 1 Levco Prodigy 4). -- Larry Rosenstein Object Specialist Apple Computer AppleLink: Rosenstein1 UUCP: {sun, voder, nsc, mtxinu, dual}!apple!lsr CSNET: lsr@Apple.com
espen@well.UUCP (Peter Espen) (09/05/87)
In article <4933@utah-cs.UUCP>, t-jacobs@utah-cs.UUCP (Tony Jacobs) writes: > The multifinder leaves about 550k (depending on what you have in your system) > around in a 1 meg Mac to run applications. You could then run 5 100k programs > or 1 500k program. You won't be able to run Excel and Word 3.1 at the same > time but then what would a poor student be doing with programs like that > anyway? I'll bet anything that even a person with a 2 to 8 Meg Mac can't run Excel and Word 3.01 (Not Word 3.1) under MultiFinder either. One of those programs or MultiFinder is bound to have one if not several bugs, and I'll bet the rich mucho memoried Mac owner is going to CRASH!!!
moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer) (09/05/87)
In response, three axioms:
1) You don't pull computer power out of a magic hat.
2) There is no free lunch.
3) You wanna play, you gotta pay.
Besides, $49 hardly pays Apple for distribution and disk costs. And if $49
is so steep, download it from your local BBS or Authorized User's Group.
I just hope they release Multi-Finder soon -- I got 2.5 Megs and I wanna USE
it!
"[New York] is the place where if you have
talent, and you believe in yourself, and you
show people what you can do, then some day,
maybe -- just maybe -- you could get shoved
in front of a moving subway train."
-- Dave Barry
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
INTERNET: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM
Manual UUCP: {uw-beaver, sun, allegra, hplsla, lbl-csam}!fluke!moriarty
CREDO: You gotta be Cruel to be Kind...
<*> DISCLAIMER: Do what you want with me, but leave my employers alone! <*>infinity@well.UUCP (Infinity Software) (09/05/87)
IT's called upward compatibility. As long as you keep moving upward in the product line, you retain compatibility with what works what will be serviced if it breaks what is supported I'm still WAITING (you listening Larry?) for Apple to come out with MacWorks XL 4.0 so that no matter HOW slowly it executes, my Lisa will emulate the LATEST Mac. I want the latest 256K ROMs emulated, I want to run A/UX, I want a SCSI expansion board I want a Mac Sound Emulation expansion board And if you refuse to build these things to support your original supporters, then support those who are willing to support your original supporters by releasing enough technical information about the Lisa to upgrade hardware. THAT's how you build customer loyalty. Where are the new cards to plug into my LISA card cage, Apple? Apple used to put out buttons you could wear with the IBM logoish: I'll Buy Mac which is the upgrade to Lucky I Sold Apple buttons. I don't want to sell my Lisa and buy a Mac II. I already have most of it. Half the bus width, and 1/3 the processor speed. That's OK. But when you stopped being compatible with new software upgrades, ya started eroding my loyalty. How come on System 3.2 the control panel volume setting of 0 blinks the menu bar on the XL like it should, But on the System 4.0 control panel volume setting of 0 I get an almost inaudible bell sound and no menu bar blink? Don't forget those of us who invested more than a Mac II costs now, back when you guys were hungry. If I have to give up my Mac XL because Apple refuses to support it, I guarantee I won't buy a Mac II. I'll buy a real computer, a Sun Microsystems machine for less money and more screen resolution and a whole USENET full of software support. Where's my 800Kbyte double sidded floppy upgrade, apple? When I originally purchased a 2-drive @ 800Kbyte each floppy system? Twiggy -- Infinity Software, Ltd. 1144 65th St. #C Emeryville, CA 94608 (415)420-1551 Voice; (415)420-1756 Data; USENET: infinity@well.uucp
rob@uokmax.UUCP (Robert K. Shull) (09/07/87)
In article <3894@well.UUCP> sunny@hoptoad.UUCP (sunny at Astral Consultants) writes: >And if you refuse to build these things to support your original supporters, >then support those who are willing to support your original supporters >by releasing enough technical information about the Lisa to upgrade >hardware. THAT's how you build customer loyalty. Where are the new >cards to plug into my LISA card cage, Apple? Yeah, and what about us Apple ][ people. There wouldn't even BE a Lisa OR a Mac without us. I want an upgrade to a Mac II. But make sure I'm still compatible with every piece of software or hardware ever made for the Apple II. And make it cheap. $250 should be about right. But make sure you bundle some software with it. I shouldn't have to buy more software just to use my new machine. And hurry. >If I have to give up my Mac XL because Apple refuses to support it, >I guarantee I won't buy a Mac II. I'll buy a real computer, a >Sun Microsystems machine for less money and more screen resolution >and a whole USENET full of software support. Tsk, tsk. NEVER mention "Sun", "support", and "less money" all in the same breath. You're just asking for it. Robert P.S. In case you didn't realize, much -) -- Robert K. Shull University of Oklahoma, Engineering Computer Network {seismo!okstate or ihnp4!occrsh}!uokmax!rob CIS 73765,1254 Delphi RKSHULL
anson@elrond.CalComp.COM (Ed Anson) (09/08/87)
In article <1672@sputnik.COM> moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer) writes: >3) You wanna play, you gotta pay. > >Besides, $49 hardly pays Apple for distribution and disk costs. And if $49 >is so steep, download it from your local BBS or Authorized User's Group. I don't mind paying for value. What bothers me is being forced to buy from Apple dealers *only*. Of the $49 I suppose at least $25 is for the dealer, and frankly, passing through a dealer's hands doesn't add $25 in value. If I could get it from APDA, or from one of the mail order houses, I would be much happier -- not because it would cost less (it would), but because it would be a lot less hassle. I'm very busy. It takes me something like an hour and a half to make a trip to the Apple dealer. It takes me five minutes to order it over the phone, and I get it quicker -- except nobody offers to take telephone orders for Apple software. I wish Apple would reconsider their apparent distribution policy. I wish they would make their software a bit easier to get. -- ===================================================================== Ed Anson, Calcomp Display Products Division, Hudson NH 03051 (603) 885-8712, anson@elrond.CalComp.COM
drc@dbase.UUCP (Dennis Cohen) (09/10/87)
In article <3779@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU>, jww@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU (Joel West) writes: > MultiFinder does not REQUIRE 2Meg. However, since the Mac Plus > programs have been getting bigger and bigger. > > I'll bet you could put MacPaint and MacWrite on a 1Mb machine. > (Don't forget, with MultiFinder, the Finder is automatically > part of your Switcher-style partition set, so that's actually > three tasks.) > Sorry, but I just tried it out on my 1MB Plus and Write 4.5, Paint 1.5, and MultiFinder couldn't quite hack it together. I don't mean that it crashed or anything of that sort; however, Write kept giving me messages about inadequate memory and Paint barely ran at all. I do like the Finder that comes with it though, so I will probably use the SingleTasking throughout. BTW: It really bogs down if you have a large System Heap (like maybe TMON and Suitcase). If I want to multitask, I'll use the Pyramid, thanks (or wait 'til PMMUs are standard and we can do it right). Dennis Cohen Ashton-Tate Glendale Development Center dBASE Mac Development Team -------------------------- Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are my own. I don't know what opinions (if any) my employer might have.
lsr@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein) (09/11/87)
In article <233@dbase.UUCP> drc@dbase.UUCP (Dennis Cohen) writes: > >Sorry, but I just tried it out on my 1MB Plus and Write 4.5, Paint 1.5, and >MultiFinder couldn't quite hack it together. I don't mean that it crashed >or anything of that sort; however, Write kept giving me messages about >inadequate memory and Paint barely ran at all. I tried MacWrite 4.6, MacPaint 1.5, and Multifinder 1.0b7, with the default memory allocations (224K for MacWrite, 146K for MacPaint). As I recall, MacPaint's memory usage is pretty fixed. If it has enough memory it will keep the whole document in memory, otherwise it spools it to the disk (you can tell by using tha hand tool to scroll). In my case, it did keep the document in memory. I was able to print on the LaserWriter. (This was in the background; the background print spooler application takes 128K of memory.) I did not give MacWrite a really thorough test. I was able to open a 6K file, duplicate it 5 times (12 pages total), and change the style of the whole document. I believe that MacWrite will limit the total number of paragraphs & rulers depending on how much memory you give it, so 224K may not be enough to open some larger files. >BTW: It really bogs down if you have a large System Heap (like maybe TMON and >Suitcase). If there is a lot of System-related memory being used, then you have less RAM available for applications. Most applications will degrade their performance and/or capabilities accordingly. -- Larry Rosenstein Object Specialist Apple Computer AppleLink: Rosenstein1 UUCP: {sun, voder, nsc, mtxinu, dual}!apple!lsr CSNET: lsr@Apple.com