Windows Debate
"DOS people will be very excited about non-preemptive multitasking. Five
years ago, when the Amigaphiles were jumping up and down about it, DOS
users insisted that they didn't need it."
It's taken a long time for multitasking to be accepted as "worthwhile" at
all. Heck, in 1980, you could get PM multitasking OS's for Cromenco
(Cromix), GIMIX and SWTPC (OS-9), and probably some others. Around 1982 you
could get Oasys for Z80s, and MP/M for Intel cpus.
SEVEN years ago (1983) you could buy a preemptive multitasking OS for the
CoCo; and while those users were also "jumping up and down about it", the
general reaction from the C64 and Atari (and even most of the CoCo) owners
was that "they didn't need it" ;-). Deja vu? Nobody's perfect.
"When the crying and screaming gets loud enough, don't you think Microsoft
will drop in true preemptive multitasking?"
Sure. It just takes time and effort to move things over. Multitasking is
now "obviously" a desireable feature. And while the step from co-op
multitasking to preemptive can be tough, it is also a natural progression,
I think. BTW, don't forget the next step: multiuser support. OS9ers love
it; yet others claim they "don't need it". And so things go 'round again.
<sigh>
It never stops. Coprocessors, multitasking, sound, you name it…
everything is an "I don't need it" item until they become cheap or popular
items <grin>.