Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 2nd Jun 2012 02:21 UTC, submitted by rohan_p
Thread beginning with comment 520464
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: LOWER than you expected?
by MOS6510 on Sat 2nd Jun 2012 17:44
in reply to "RE[3]: LOWER than you expected?"
RE[5]: LOWER than you expected?
by zima on Sat 2nd Jun 2012 18:33
in reply to "RE[4]: LOWER than you expected?"
You never experienced 'something' slowing down what you were doing.
Guru Meditations tended to be a bit of a bummer though, really
Overall, let's be honest, there were less practical scenarios for heavy multitasking and the software didn't do that much ...actually, I wonder if this, & generally how Amiga stagnated at some point, wasn't related to lack of memory protection (but also to disjointed stack of libraries from various sources): making ever more complex software difficult to do, prioritizing careful tinkering just so it won't nuke the OS while running.
And anyway, Amigas were usually used as single-tasking game machines...





Member since:
2005-07-06
And it was a damn good deal, with great bang-per-buck. Those new "Amigas" are nowhere close to that.
For some values of "real" at least - I have some reservations about calling like that a system without memory protection (still), so depending on good behavior of apps.
They are... PCs, really. Just with large part of what actually makes PCs good (scales bringing prices down and performance up, large and mature library of software) discarded.