Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!claris!jazzman
From: jazzman@claris.com (Sydney R. Polk)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: Protected-mode snake oil
Message-ID: <11178@claris.com>
Date: 10 Aug 90 17:44:50 GMT
References: <1204.26c2fb48@waikato.ac.nz>
Organization: Claris Corporation, Santa Clara CA
Lines: 20

From article <1204.26c2fb48@waikato.ac.nz>, by ccc_ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University):
> There was a discussion a while back about the virtues of protected operating
> systems. A number of people seem to believe that PCs in general, and
> Macintosh in particular, will become much more reliable once they start
> to enforce a separation between user-level and kernel-level code.

I would just be happy if I got an error when I balsted memory outside the
application heap.  I would estimate that fully 70% of my debugging time
on the Mac is spent tracking down who is blasting memory where, whether
it's me or the system of some bozo init that somebody has on there machine.
Maybe it's nicer for the machine to limp along after somebody plugs a hole
somewhere in a random data structure, but for debugging, it would be nice
if I could tell immediately.


-- 
Syd Polk           | Wherever you go, there you are.
jazzman@claris.com | Let the music be your light.
GO 'STROS!         | These opinions are mine.  Any resemblence to other
GO RICE!           |  opinions, real or fictitious, is purely coincidence.