Message-ID: <01BCF8F7.B141C7A0.dda@individual.com>
From: "David D'Antonio" <dda@individual.com>
To: "'new-httpd@apache.org'" <new-httpd@apache.org>
Subject: RE: MS considering moving IIS into NT kernel
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 16:40:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org

On Monday, November 24, 1997 4:32 PM, Ben Laurie 
[SMTP:ben@algroup.co.uk] wrote:

[snip]

> Hey! I've had this great idea - why not run everything in the
> kernel?
> All that nasty context switching is such a waste of time. And
> pre-emptive multitasking, I mean, who really needs that? Only
> losers who
> can't write decent co-operative multitasking software. So
> that'll save
> some more of that nasty switching. Oh yeah, and seperate
> address spaces
> - they're a real pain - we could make the switches 10 times
> faster
> without those. Cool! Now, what should it be called? I know! 
MS-
> DOS!

Hell, punt that slow, boring context switching entirely. After 
all,
people only really *do* one thing at a time. So they obviously 
don't
need their computers to do more than that...

> Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686|Apache Group 
member

To me, MS finally admitted how "stable" their software is when 
they
put an "re-install" button on the Office 97 setup program. It 
*just*
re-installs everything you installed last time, in case anything 
got
corrupted. Say by one of those cool new fast kernel thingies, 
I'll
bet..

DDA

--
David D'Antonio CNE - dda@nospam.ziplink.net
 Some they do and some they don't and some ya just can't tell
  Some they will and some they won't and some it's just as well
						-SuperTramp