From: "Campbell, Rolf [SKY:1U32:EXCH]" <moscoop AT americasm01 DOT nt DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Win 2000 & Djgpp
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 15:11:42 -0500
Organization: Nortel Networks
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <38ADA77E.2E1B3EE9@americasm01.nt.com>
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 10002181833350 DOT 630-100000 AT darkstar DOT grendel DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wmerh0tk.ca.nortel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; I; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/785)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel wrote:

> 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.

    Well, my limited windows programming experience (16-bit) tells me that Win9x uses
non-premtive multitasking.  Which means that it is the responsibility of the programs
to decide when they've had there share of the processor (they must relinquish control
explicitly).  If you run a VB3 program the lookes like "sub Form_load() \n do:loop \n
end sub" or something, only interrupt driven program will continue to run.

--
(\/) Rolf Campbell (\/)