Talk:Preemption (computing)

message: Which instance in a computer system causes the scheduler to get activated once in a while? --Abdull 14:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scheduler activation 

message: Please cross link each os with the scheduling algorithims that it uses. I was interested in OpenBSD scheduler, but that page says nothing in this regard. I post here because those interested in scheduling are more likely to know what is the case than those only interested in the specific os. --cant remember my password (41.243.106.81 08:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross link 

message: Pre-emptive?  Cooperative?  ----  Theaveng (talk) 14:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that NT predated Windows 98 by five years, but was not intended for the same market. Letdorf (talk) 19:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: What about Windows 98?

message: In the section "Systems supporting preemptive multitasking" the last paragraph states-
Preemptive multitasking is a rare example of an advanced feature of the Amiga operating system which was not found on other desktops of a similar price range during the heyday of the Amiga and as a consequence supporters of the Amiga system tend to focus an emphasis upon its importance and in doing so tend to overlook deficiencies in the Amiga computer system which led to unresolved doubts surrounding its absolute usefulness as a professional computing platform and ultimately to its downfall.
Why this change from a purely factual tone of various flavors of os and their different techniques on preemption to this judgemental comment on Amiga users?  It doesn't add any valuable information to the article.  I noticed there was no discussion on users who reflected fondly on OS/2 which was significantly ahead of its time and still has fans.  There is no mention of NeXT and/or Nextstep/Openstep and Steve Jobs aquiring his previous company and repurposing Nextstep.
I suggest you simply drop the last paragraph from the section "Systems supporting preemptive multitasking" and add a reference to OS X evolving from Nextstep.  You mention other os flavors evolving from their sources.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgehh (talk • contribs) 13:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Going from a factual to a political/judgemental tone 

message: *history of pre-emption: invention and first application.
*hardware support for preemption  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.157.240.24 (talk) 14:10, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: To do

message: The article currently states that OS/2 never supported preemption and that it always supported preemption.  From reading various articles from around the web, I believe on the latter is correct, but I am not confident enough to make the change myself.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozweepay (talk • contribs) 22:55, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This seems to have been fixed. BernardoSulzbach (talk) 10:31, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: OS/2 Contradiction

message: Nice_(Unix) isn't referenced in this article.  Why? Charles Juvon (talk) 01:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, interesting. Because it's nearly 50 years old? How does it relate to preemption, any specifications for nice? How does it relate to RT? Cross-example https://documentation.suse.com/sle-rt/15-SP1/html/SLE-RT-all/art-slert-hwtest.html Greetings --𝔏92934923525 (talk) 17:48, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renice