Date:	Fri, 18 Feb 2000 18:37:24 +0600 (LKT)
From:	Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel <kalum AT crosswinds DOT net>
X-Sender:	root AT darkstar DOT grendel DOT net
To:	djgpp AT Delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Win 2000 & Djgpp
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.LNX.4.10.10002180745360.1430-100000@midpec.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.10.10002181833350.630-100000@darkstar.grendel.net>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Prashant TR wrote:

> 
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Chris Jones wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > On my Pentium-233 it does take a long time to start up, but once running, it
> > > can multitask much more smoothly than Win9x - I can play an mp3 and work at
> > 
> > Not mutiltasking it is more likely task switching. For ex just see how
> > slow and chunky the multitasking becomes say when you run GCC on a large
> > build and then try to open up menu's, run apps etc.
> 
> So, what's the difference b/w multitasking and task switching? They are
> all the same. There can never be more than one task running at a time. The
> task switching is so fast that you tend to think there are many programs
> running. Multitasking is done by the scheduler which simply jumps to the
> TSS selector of the task, which *is* task switching.
> 
> Maybe you meant something else.

I was referring to the type of task switching done by olden day dosshells.
A test of how good a OS is how smoothly it multitasks. 

I don't know why windoze fails miserably in this respect as I find that
even on a speedy system things like disk acessing done by a program seem
to slow down the whole system to a crawl. Just see how slow starting new
programs, opening menus, dialogs becomes when there is some disk usage
going on.

Grendel


Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)

- Raw text -