Re: Windoze 95 is not multi-tasking, it just pretends it is mul
Þann 11-Apr-98 skrifar Tristan Day:
>
> 1. Win95 is designed to make the program that you have 'active' (the top
> program you are using at the time) work fastest and gives it max power while
> the background tasks (the ones you've got open but aren't using at the
> moment) have a very small amount of CPU usage and are minimised in memory.
> This can be a complete pain if you're using lots of programs on a server or
> many important, power-demanding programs at once, and is really crummy for
> CAD/CAM and other such programs.
>
> 2. Linux seems to think it's running on several terminals, because you can
> run lots of different consoles at the same time, as if you were only using
> one (eg when you press Control-Alt-F2, F3, etc). Win95 doesn't do this.
>
Well, not quite.
The program you *are* running actively will always be on *top* in memory,
and will have the most CPU usage, as well. That is irrelevant of the type
of OS you have. So, in this concern Win95 comforms adequately.
It's the job *shifting* that's different, and the memory management.
Windows, whatever version... is optimized toward the GUI, so the job shifting
between processes will be the GUI application (Top most) and then other
applications, that will have a far lower priority than any GUI process
available. This is extremely crummy (as you describe), if you are using some
'daemon' type software under Windows 95... it will be cut down into 20%
because of it.
And the memory management... well, I don't think anyone needs a lesson
in how *poor* Windows software are where Virtual memory is concerned. The
way our good friend Bill Gates, obviously thought it, is that if you're in
a position where swapping is needed, you need more memory 'REAL' memory. So,
Virtual Memory is just bogus in his mind... and just there to remind the
user, that he needs to go out and BUY more memory for his machine, or a
much faster machine (To make up for the poor virtual memory design), or
both... which is the situation most users end up in.
Well, relatively, the guys attitude towards Virtual memory isn't that
much un-undestandable. The PC doesn't have bus architechture that will
allow the machine to access any really fast external storage simultaneously
with other IO access. So, virtual memory will always be relatively slow,
and boil down to the fact that if you need such performance, you should
get the equipment suitable for it :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orn Einar Hansen oe.hansen@oehansen.pp.se
oehansen@daimi.aau.dk
voice+fax; +46 035 217194
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: