Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!pepsi!phil
From: phil@pepsi.amd.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 640K limit
Message-ID: <28874@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Date: 22 Jan 90 22:03:35 GMT
References: <4668.25aed7f2@uwovax.uwo.ca> <1468@blackbird.afit.af.mil> <28808@amdcad.AMD.COM> <729@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>
Sender: news@amdcad.AMD.COM
Reply-To: phil@pepsi.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 12

In article <10344@saturn.ucsc.edu> ted@helios.ucsc.edu (Ted Cantrall) writes:
|How would things have worked out if IBM had put this 384k block at the bottom
|of the memory (0-384). That would have left no constrictions on upward
|expansion except the 8088. And that problem would have been remedied by
|the 80286.		-ted-

Ha ha. You have to run in protected mode to get more than 1 meg on the
286. As long as you're doing that, may as well go to OS/2.

--
Phil Ngai, phil@diablo.amd.com		{uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil
Peace through strength.