Re: [OT] How far have we come?
On 6 May 2001, at 11:23, jjnick at cvn.com wrote:
>
> I agree, we have gained nothing except headaches, in my opinion, except
> maybe preemptive multitasking . . . But, Linux has this though . . .? I am
> the
> program director at the local radio station here, and their computer system
> that
> runs the radio station is DOS based! Run's for weeks until another power
> outage
> . . . UPS time . . . anyway . . .
Dos can multitask, DR-dos does it, you just need the task manager. Shoot, i
had my C64 time-slice multitasking, with on-screen windows, back when MS
was playing with Windoze 1 (yeas, it did exist). And with the disk drive
programmed, it did discreet multitasking too, one assy language program
running on the disk drive's cpu and the puter doing something else. In a way,
going to an ibm "PC" clone was a step way down in technology back then.
> I'd love to see a true self-diagnostic/object oriented/social interface
> w/artificial intelligence/3D Hyperbolic browsing/secure OS . . . Anybody
> ready?
You'd need discreet puters to do that. Given the size of the OS's code,
mistakes are almost inevitable, and a supervisor puter would need reboot
privelidges over the other processes and hardware, in a way that doesn't
affect the other processes. Unfortunately, Eu isn't so good at networking or
real-world interfacing in anything but dos, where it can grab the hardware and
not thread. Toss in a little mIRC, a little REBOL, some Dialect, and RDS
could ask as much $ as they want for Eu and get it (but not form me, i don't
have any $).
Kat
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
