#Amiga Downloads
9 messages in this thread
I can only say that after owning an Amiga 2000 and 3000T plus working with
an A1200, I never really had any driving need to dive into any of the
manuals. The Amiga is far simpler for me to set up than any IBM PC. For
example, I never had to install any mouse drivers.
Also, Windows doesn't really count, as it is a cosmetic environment
piggybacked onto DOS. AmigaDOS isn't piggybacked onto anything and doesn't
need X number of mb of ram just to run itself. For multitasking, the
required code to initiate it on the Amiga is about half of 1K and on the
Mac is over 60K.
As for good books on the Amiga, Abacus & IDG produce very good books which
elaborate further on the Amiga OS and hardware. Denny Atkins' books are
almost always a good read.
As far as I'm concerned, all of the answers I might need for beginning to
use AmigaDOS are in the manuals. They just away at alot of fat, unlike
PC-DOS manuals. I think what you're wanting are more tutorials. Correct?
Then you should get books from the publishers I mentioned earlier. They,
like Abacus for example, provide many tutorials and examples and in some
cases, disks, to help you out. They are also not expensive. About the same
as any other books in computing. You could try to find them in the mall
here or in your local store.
-= Vance =- Image Master
Flying high on Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster R/t!
Vance,
The Macintosh DOES NOT MULTITASK!!!!!!!! It does task switching, which
is little better than quiting one program to start another, at least you
come back where you were when you switched, but only ONE program is
allowed to run at a time.
James Du Bois via AutoPilot
Member of the Bermuda Triangle Exploratory Expedition 1992 – 1951
The Macintosh uses a cooperative system to appear to run multiple
programs simultaneously. The Amiga uses a preemptive system to appear to
run multiple programs simultaneously. By the usual(i.e., academic courses
in OS design), only the latter counts as “true'' multitasking. But from
the user's point of view, they are roughly equivalent. True, cooperative
multitasking results in a less responsive system (you can't run an
I/O-bound process at high priority while leaving most of the CPU to the
compute-bound processes), and it tends to collapse in the presence of
non-conforming programs (a single poorly-written program can lock out all
other processes), but to call it nothing more than a task-switcher is
misleading and incorrect.
Jeff,
precisely. While I do not have much respect for co-operative
multitasking, it has been a semi-standard on many machines, not just the
IBM-compat or the Mac. Everything works so long as all task cooperate,
but we should be all to familiar with this notion. On the Amiga,
everything works here as well. When there is a fault, crash goes the
system, be it AmigaDOS, System 7, or Windows.
Brian
Actually, since getting 2.1, I don't think I have had a fatal system
crash. The suspend option seems to work rather well. Of course, I'm
not programming any more, so the chances of really screwing things up
are greatly decreased. <G> Still, it's one heck of a lot better
than System 7.
Even though the MAC is a task switcher, it does allow background operation
of multiple apps. The Amiga on the other hand, has a preemptive
multitasking OS.
-Jonathan
// Amiga online via Autopilot
\\// MAC IIcx & 486 emulation via Amiga!
Sorry I didn't state it more clearly. As you will read or have read, the
other users here have explained it in greater detail.
-= Vance =- Image Master
Flying high on Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster R/t!
James,
I agree with you regarding the Mac. I find Windows' pseudo-multitasking
better than what you get with System 7.
//Jonathan,
\\//via AutoPilot
I thought Windozzzzz did the same thing as the Mac. I thought it
just did task switching.
James Du Bois via AutoPilot
Member of the Bermuda Triangle Exploratory Expedition 1992 – 1951