From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: MS's misconduct!
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 05:04:08 GMT

In article <1992Sep25.200526.11598@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>>The problem is that there are dreadfully few OS/2 applications that take
>>advantage of multitasking... so that when people refer to multitasking on
>>OS/2, they talk about disks and modems... something that can really be
>>pooh-poohed.
>
>Lotus apps generally print in the background, allowing you to work on
>other files while print formatting is going on.  There are plenty of
>other examples as well.
>

... I stand by what I said.  There are dreadfully few apps that take
advantage of multitasking.  A mere handful, on the PC.  This will change...
and when it does, multitasking will be a reason to switch.  Until then,
all it is is potential.

[stuff deleted about a "better" download solution would be multiple
computers]
>
>Your needs vs. mine.  I can't afford mutiple computers.  Apparantly,
>you have them lying around doing nothing anyway, so it's not a
>problem. 

Poor you.  But the point is, that there are better solutions in some
instances.  Even so, downloading in the background is not a very
popular/critical thing for most people anyway.

>
>>The power of multitasking isn't in running multiple Apps.  TASK SWITCHERS
>>can do that just fine for the reason you mention above: no one can
>>do more than one thing at one time with reasonable efficiency--as I wrote
>>elsewhere: people make poor multitaskers.  *I* cannot create a spreadsheet
>>AND write a submission at the same time... or Telemarket and balance the
>>books at the same time.... if I could, I'd never have to hire anybody.
>
>But I can create a spreadsheet while my 30 page term paper is
>printing.  No task switcher can do this.

First, one does not write a thirty page term paper every day (or even
every month).  Second, if *I* just finished writing a 30 page term paper,
the least of my desires is to crank open a spreadsheet--the thing on my
mind would be... Pizza (or sleep)!)!


>
>>Multitasking's power is in developing software.  Creating a solution to
>>a problem is much easier if you can abstract it to the level of: I'll
>>tell this process to wait for input, massage it, and pass it to this
>>process....
>
>In academics.  Most people don't write their own software.  Sure, this
>is a big source of multitasking's power, but don't blind yourself to
>the fact that there are more mundane uses for it.  You may consider
>print spooling and telecommunications to be a waste of a machine's
>power, but most of us don't have or want that many computers (and
>monitors and keyboards) on our desks at once.

No, I'm talking about as a benefit for the PC industry.  The long range
benefit of multitasking isn't "printing in the background"--heck a $49
printer buffer is probably more useful than that (and even DOS can
print in the background!).  The benefit is that programmers will have
a new way of solving problems--which will result in programs that are
an order of magnitude "more complex" than current public domain
solutions...

>
>>There is another, rambling thought that passes through the corridors of my
>>mind: Multitasking, in the end, may be good for the Company... but how
>>about for the Office Worker?  I can imagine some top exec going to his
>>admin assistant and saying "I want this and this and this and this and this
>>and this done by Lunch"--thinking the worker now has OS/NT and can
>>multitask.  Horrible thought, huh?
>>
>>Show of hands, everyone, how many people think that computerization has
>>benefitted the office worker?  (my hand is down).  
>
>Does this mean that we should stifle the technology?  What's your point?
>-- 

The point, is that, in the end, aren't we simply making more fashionable
chains for ourselves?  If you don't think it's ironic, then the effort
was wasted on you.

-> Joe <-

My opinions.