Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 06:44 UTC
Permalink for comment 276724
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-12-18
"This arguement is off-topic and pointless in this case, as the Amiga's mouse system and NT's are two different beasties. The Amiga's will continue to run when the rest of the OS is locked up not due to some miraculous scheduler, but becaue of the custom hardware, which is what actually drives the mouse pointer. The chipset gave the Amiga this ability, not the OS."
My point was about the effectiveness of the NT and Amiga schedulers and a direct reply to blatant unsubstantiated FUD regarding responsiveness. That I addressed why the cursor on an NT box (same is true for other OS’s on conventional PC hardware) can become “jumpy” was an addendum at the end of the post. The post was not about device interrupt handling or how the mouse cursor gets drawn to the screen.