Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uccba!uceng!dmocsny From: dmocsny@uceng.UC.EDU (daniel mocsny) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Memory utilization & inter-process contention Summary: Yearning for the Ultimate OS Message-ID: <2089@uceng.UC.EDU> Date: 5 Sep 89 09:44:14 GMT References: <1114@aber-cs.UUCP> <278@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk> Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati, College of Engg. Lines: 33 In article <278@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk>, jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid) writes: > A VM system general enough to perform well for most potential users and > their applications on most potential hardware platforms is asking a lot. And the cost of failing to give this to the users is a lot more. Namely, OS fragmentation today costs users $$ billions/yr in lost time, reduced software availability, artificially increased complexity, and delays in quickly exploiting higher-performance architecture. This isn't pocket change, nor is it funny money. This is real wealth, the kind you can take to the bank. Fragmentation takes this money out of the users' pockets. Meaning that those users have less remaining in their pockets to spend on more high-tech toys. The computer industry is large enough now that it begins to tax the ability of society to subsidize its past failures to develop and adhere to comprehensive standards. Maximizing future computer industry growth depends on removing as much nonessential complexity from the user as possible. The best way to do this is to listen to what the users are screaming for. From the user's standpoint, a computer is essentially a tool to access the work of programmers. I.e., users don't buy computers because they like the layout of the motherboard, the elegance of the address decoders, etc. They buy computers to run software. The only questions are: how much software will the box run, and how fast? The ability of a programmer to generate wealth for users is proportional to the number of boxes that can run that programmer's work. Therefore, for the computer industry to deliver the most value to the customer (and to consequently share in that value) it must take whatever steps are necessary to stop destroying the work of programmers. Dan Mocsny dmocsny@uceng.uc.edu