Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 16 Feb 2007 23:10 "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" wrote: > Rich Grise, Plainclothes Hippie wrote: > > jmfbahciv wrote: > >> "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: > > > >>>As usual, you redefine the discussion to suit yourself. > >> > >>I don't think he is redefining it; I think he believes he's talking about > >>the same thing. He keeps reminding me of the last tech I had to finally > >>resort to beating up in order to get him to understand what was going to > >>happen. I don't think that guy knows to this day why his way was the > >>exactly wrong way. > > > > Yes, sadly most people would rather be right than happy. > > To hold those two concepts as mutually exclusive is, > to coin a phrase, strange. He didn't as far as I can see. Graham
From: Eeyore on 16 Feb 2007 23:14 MassiveProng wrote: > jasen <jasen(a)free.net.nz> Gave us: > > Ken Smith <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote: > > > >> The DOS mind set was to only do one thing at a time. Some bits of later > >> versions looked like multitasking was intended but abandoned. Even very > >> later versions save registers into code space instead of onto the stack. > > > >I read that there was a multitasking dos released by Microsoft in > >Europe. and then there's Deskview and I think Digital Research had > >a go at multitasking dos too. > > > >I played with something called multidos (I think it) was shareware or > >freeware and faked multitasking somehow. > > > DesqView was a task switcher. One app at a time. > > DesqViewX was a true multitasking system that ran under DOS with a > memory manager. It was also an x server and could run distributed > processes on another machine running DesqViewX and TCP/IP had to be > the protocol. > > DR didn't do any multithreaded OS. > > OS/2 was a true multi-threaded, multitasking OS, despite coming out > back when all we had were 386s and 486s. There was milti-user CP/M wasn't there ? Graham
From: MassiveProng on 17 Feb 2007 01:13 On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 04:14:00 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > > >MassiveProng wrote: > >> jasen <jasen(a)free.net.nz> Gave us: >> > Ken Smith <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote: >> > >> >> The DOS mind set was to only do one thing at a time. Some bits of later >> >> versions looked like multitasking was intended but abandoned. Even very >> >> later versions save registers into code space instead of onto the stack. >> > >> >I read that there was a multitasking dos released by Microsoft in >> >Europe. and then there's Deskview and I think Digital Research had >> >a go at multitasking dos too. >> > >> >I played with something called multidos (I think it) was shareware or >> >freeware and faked multitasking somehow. >> >> >> DesqView was a task switcher. One app at a time. >> >> DesqViewX was a true multitasking system that ran under DOS with a >> memory manager. It was also an x server and could run distributed >> processes on another machine running DesqViewX and TCP/IP had to be >> the protocol. >> >> DR didn't do any multithreaded OS. >> >> OS/2 was a true multi-threaded, multitasking OS, despite coming out >> back when all we had were 386s and 486s. > >There was milti-user CP/M wasn't there ? > >Graham > That I do not know. Was that not in the day of the dumb terminal? Also... multi-user? We were talking about an OS that ran on PCs that would multi-task. That is a different animal, and at that time was relatively rare on a PC.
From: Eeyore on 17 Feb 2007 01:30 MassiveProng wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > >MassiveProng wrote: > >> jasen <jasen(a)free.net.nz> Gave us: > >> > Ken Smith <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote: > >> > > >> >> The DOS mind set was to only do one thing at a time. Some bits of later > >> >> versions looked like multitasking was intended but abandoned. Even very > >> >> later versions save registers into code space instead of onto the stack. > >> > > >> >I read that there was a multitasking dos released by Microsoft in > >> >Europe. and then there's Deskview and I think Digital Research had > >> >a go at multitasking dos too. > >> > > >> >I played with something called multidos (I think it) was shareware or > >> >freeware and faked multitasking somehow. > >> > >> > >> DesqView was a task switcher. One app at a time. > >> > >> DesqViewX was a true multitasking system that ran under DOS with a > >> memory manager. It was also an x server and could run distributed > >> processes on another machine running DesqViewX and TCP/IP had to be > >> the protocol. > >> > >> DR didn't do any multithreaded OS. > >> > >> OS/2 was a true multi-threaded, multitasking OS, despite coming out > >> back when all we had were 386s and 486s. > > > >There was milti-user CP/M wasn't there ? > > > >Graham > > > That I do not know. Was that not in the day of the dumb terminal? > > Also... multi-user? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiuser_DOS > We were talking about an OS that ran on PCs that would multi-task. > That is a different animal, and at that time was relatively rare on a > PC. Sure. Graham
From: MassiveProng on 17 Feb 2007 01:51
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 06:30:49 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > > >MassiveProng wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: >> >MassiveProng wrote: >> >> jasen <jasen(a)free.net.nz> Gave us: >> >> > Ken Smith <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> The DOS mind set was to only do one thing at a time. Some bits of later >> >> >> versions looked like multitasking was intended but abandoned. Even very >> >> >> later versions save registers into code space instead of onto the stack. >> >> > >> >> >I read that there was a multitasking dos released by Microsoft in >> >> >Europe. and then there's Deskview and I think Digital Research had >> >> >a go at multitasking dos too. >> >> > >> >> >I played with something called multidos (I think it) was shareware or >> >> >freeware and faked multitasking somehow. >> >> >> >> >> >> DesqView was a task switcher. One app at a time. >> >> >> >> DesqViewX was a true multitasking system that ran under DOS with a >> >> memory manager. It was also an x server and could run distributed >> >> processes on another machine running DesqViewX and TCP/IP had to be >> >> the protocol. >> >> >> >> DR didn't do any multithreaded OS. >> >> >> >> OS/2 was a true multi-threaded, multitasking OS, despite coming out >> >> back when all we had were 386s and 486s. >> > >> >There was milti-user CP/M wasn't there ? >> > >> >Graham >> > >> That I do not know. Was that not in the day of the dumb terminal? >> >> Also... multi-user? > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiuser_DOS Far out. I should have known about this. I used to run a DR DOS at one time. > >> We were talking about an OS that ran on PCs that would multi-task. >> That is a different animal, and at that time was relatively rare on a >> PC. > >Sure. Suuuuuuuure... :-] |