Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:57:35 -0500 (EST) From: Marco Radzinschi <marco@radzinschi.com> To: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> Cc: FreeBDS-Questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: As usual, I disagree. Message-ID: <20011129104417.H528-100000@mail.radzinschi.com> In-Reply-To: <01b501c17891$a5f56b40$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Anthony Atkielski wrote: [snip!] > Note that the event-driven architecture of Windows requires a lot of swapping in > itself, regardless of memory-management algorithms. For example, significant > events must be signalled to _every_ program that owns windows, and that means > that every program must be in memory to process the events, which often requires > a ton of swapping. I've seen this on many occasions. > > UNIX does not communicate between processes or between system nearly as much, > particularly with respect to asynchronous events. As a result, it does not have > to constantly swap processes in just to tell them that a user has, say, moved a > mouse. This is a MAJOR design flaw in Windows. The Operating System should take care of these events, instead of signaling EVERY program so that THEY independently take care of them. In the X Window system, for example, the programs do not have to worry about simple events. Much better design. > > Frankly, it sounds like you're religiously > > devoted to Windows on the desktop. > > Not religiously devoted, just objective enough to recognize that Windows is the > best desktop solution at this time. > You are wrong in this regard. Windows is the best desktop solution for you and many other people, but not for everyone. I would not want to do video editing on Windows - not even Windows 2000. Neither FreeBSD nor Windows is *BETTER* for the desktop. It all depends on what the user intends to use the desktop computer for. [snip!] > > Quite frankly, there's no reason for formatting > > a document using MS' proprietary *.DOC format > > when they look just as good in properly formatted > > HTML. > > HTML provides far less control over formatting than MS Word. And MS Word seems > hopelessly imprecise to those of us who do our work in Quark XPress. You are 100% correct on this, Mr. Atkielski. Word certainly does provide more formatting control than HTML. Quark XPress also provides a hell of a lot more control than Word. Comparing Quark to Word, though, is a bit like comparing a Lamborghini or a Ferrari to a Chevrolet or Ford car. :-) - Marco Radzinschi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the messagehelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011129104417.H528-100000>