Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!rex!uflorida!mephisto!ncsuvx!news
From: rnf@shumv1.uucp (Rick Fincher)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: UNIX on the Apple II?
Message-ID: <1990Jan20.185422.16706@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>
Date: 20 Jan 90 18:54:22 GMT
References: <113300242@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> <113300246@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu (Rick Fincher)
Organization: NCSU Computing Center
Lines: 26

In article <113300246@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> bcs33424@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
>
>		C'mon, Scott, I've told you time and again that 
>	the apple ][ just doesn't cut the mustard.  I read the 
>	comp.unix news groups just a few times, and I've found
>	that the unix wizards out there won't even recommend   
>	unix on a 80286 machine.  The machine is just too slow
>	and inflexible.  To port unix to the 6502 or 65C02 would
>	just be impractible.  The apple ][ is past its day.  It

The 65816 is much more suited to UNIX because of its 16 meg memory range
8 meg on the IIgs.  It also has very good interrupt response and a
small number of registers so context switching could be fast.

>	can't measure up to the '386,'486, or the 68030.  Sure,
>	it is a nice system, but you should face the facts and
>	go use the mac ]['s in Lincoln Hall if you want to run
>	unix (well, actually A/UX).  

The price doesn't measure up either!  I don't want to go stand in line to
use someone elses system.  Heck if they're paying for it I'll take a Cray over
a Mac II any day, the Mac II, 386 or 486 just don't measure up.


Rick Fincher
rnf@shumv1.ncsu.edu