Re: Multi user CP/M
- From: Bill <Bill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 07:34:01 -0600
On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 04:54:20 -0800 (PST), Bill H <bill@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
How was multi-user ability typically accomplished on the cp/m systems?
Was it a task switch / time slice where the same CPU switched between
multiple users, or were multiple CPU's used and the hardware shared?
Oh, about the same way ''multi-user''s would share say a pocket
calculator, or an automobile, or a toilet.....
You could stick multiple processors in a bigger box, allowing one
CPU per user, but those things usually cost more than the
equivalent number of stand-alone computers. I suspect it was
most;y done to make sales easier to Information Technology types
used to the one-big-processor-many-terminals ''mainframe'' paradigm
Personal Computer = one user, one computer.
You're talking about something else.
Bill
now...I've got a question....
In the sixties, we dreamed about what computers could do for
us, ''one day''. NOBODY wasted time imagining games. Now that
the 'dream' has arrived, it's a nightmare. The most incredible
invention of mankind is nothing but a toy. People are losing the
ability to discern reality from fantasy - belief in magic and such
is ubitquitous. Microsoft alone has held back development by
at least twenty years in order to wring maximum profit from their
crap. Teaching (and learning) in the sciences is unbelievably
retarded. We need to import > a quarter million engineers a year.
What went wrong?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Multi user CP/M
- From: Roger Ivie
- Re: Multi user CP/M
- References:
- Multi user CP/M
- From: Bill H
- Multi user CP/M
- Prev by Date: Multi user CP/M
- Next by Date: Re: Multi user CP/M
- Previous by thread: Multi user CP/M
- Next by thread: Re: Multi user CP/M
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|