[rescue] Mac Appliance

[Scott Newell]

>> Ok, so why did they go with cooperative? I don't believe it was 
>> considered a good idea. Pre-emptive had to have been considered
>> too "expensive" in *some* fashion...
>
>  I really have no idea.  I don't think it was a particularly good
>decision, and it has resulted in some problems. 

A cooperative multitasking system is really running just a single thread of
execution, right?  In that case, I can see that it would make a big
difference in the UI and kernel code, as they would not need to be re-entrant.

What about OS/2?  I remember someone once explaining to me that while the
OS was preemptively multitasking, the Presentation Manager was serialized
and single threaded.  I've never worked with OS/2, so I have no idea if
that's true or not.


newell