Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!aplcen!haven!udel!mmdf
From: acm131@eric.ccs.northeastern.edu (Craig Scott Lennox)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re:  Lies, lies, they're telling us lies...
Message-ID: <5003@nigel.udel.EDU>
Date: 29 Nov 89 21:32:16 GMT
Sender: mmdf@udel.EDU
Lines: 34



In Message-Id: <544@xdos.UUCP> Doug Merritt <doug@xdos.CCS.Northeastern.EDU>
writes:

> Ok, that said, he's not altogether wrong. But it should be rephrased:
> "...*forces* you to write more modular code". Mostly :-) about that part.
> There's nothing wonderful about being forced to break huge data structures
> into smaller 64K chunks. Nor for code, for that matter.

Well, according to the IBM rep, there *is*.  And this is one place where I
couldn't figure out if he was giving me a line of crap or not.  But he said
that segmented architecture makes multi-tasking more efficient, because to
change context you merely reload the code, data, and stack segments.  Instead
of copying the entire contents of page zero, out and in, etc. etc.  Of
course, whe I pressed him as to why 8 Mhz Amiga 1000's with 512K can
multi-task better than his 33Mhz PS/2's he had no satisfactory answer,
but still... for future reference, I'd like to know, is this a legitimate
issue?


> So back to the salesman: he's right, and he's wrong.
> 	Doug
> -- 
> Doug Merritt		{pyramid,apple}!xdos!doug
> Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow	Professional Wildeyed Visionary


					Craig.

        ///
       ///	"Hey OS/2, wanna race???"
   \\\///
    \XX/	acm131@eric.ccs.northestern.edu