Why can't a windows machine do it.

[stefcep2]

Its both a hardware and operating system problem.  The AmigaOS and hardware were always very tightly integrated.  SCALA running under Winuae on my dual Athlon 4800 scrolls very, very nicely, but the Windows native SCALA doesn't.  The architecture of the PC was based on the CPU doing everything, although thats changed with modern video cards having their own GPU's.  I remeber having to reboot my '030 A1200 after a GURU , booting up in 5 seconds and hearing Windows user complain about rebooting: I'd never used Windows at the time and thought well its only 5 seconds, what are they complaining about thinking Windows was like the Amiga.  Little did I know

Note that Linux running on a PC (in GUI mode) is not much better than Windows in this regard: Linux takes just as long to boot and shut down, and the interface can slow to a crawl.  In fact Linux multi-tasks worse than Windows.  One major Linux kernal developer CK has gone on record saying just how snappy and smooth his Amiga was 15 years ago, and with all of the hardware advancements since, we still can't replicate that user experience.  Sure CPU intensive stuff like encoding and decoding media is much faster, but the user experience is no better 15 years later. By now with thousand fold speed increases in hardware the OS should be booting up in no time and you should NEVER get locked out because you just stuck in a CD.  

The fact is that current PC hardware designs are determined by Windows specifications and as such the user experience will always be the way they are regardless of what OS you use.  There would need to be a fundamental architectural change for things to change, but it will never happen because we live in a Windows world.

[stefcep2]

y Tomas on 2007/9/19 16:11:12

Quote:

    Besides, what does dual core say to you?


To me it says that they have kinda reached the speed limit per core with current technology, so to speed things up they instead give you two cpus in one. I personally welcome dual core, as it really improves multitasking which is one step closer to what amiga was with it's custom chipset.
The amiga was in a way a multicore system as well, just that each chip had a specific task to do.

Speed what things up?  Most of your apps are single threaded ie each individual will run at the same speed as running on a single core cpu running at the same mhz, maybe slower, and yes I agree multitasking will improve because the other task ie app can use the other core.  Yeah this may make the user experience smoother if the tasks are cpu intensive, but hell why isn't a single cpu running at 3000 mhz enough to do this anyway?   Most PC users may burn a cd/dvd in the background , write word process, and browse or email at the same time.  Why do i need two or more cpu's running at 3000 mhz to do this? Its because the hardware architecture and the OS are crap.