Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!usc!apple!apple.com!chewy
From: chewy@apple.com (Paul Snively)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: Protected-mode snake oil
Message-ID: <9725@goofy.Apple.COM>
Date: 13 Aug 90 20:21:04 GMT
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 33
References:<1204.26c2fb48@waikato.ac.nz> <8919@ur-cc.UUCP>

In article <8919@ur-cc.UUCP> carlo@osprey.cvs.rochester.edu (Carlo Tiana) 
writes:
> flame on = Apple and DEC (a little)

[body of flame deleted for brevity]

Well, let's remember a few pertinent facts about the MacOS:

1) It was designed and implemented for a machine with 64K of ROM and 128K of
   RAM.
2) Not all Macs even have a hardware memory-management unit.  Remember, the
   Mac started off life as a personal computer, not a workstation or what have
   you.  It had a 68000, which doesn't even support an MMU.
3) While MultiFinder is pretty cool, it's also doing stuff that no tasking
   system should ever be asked to do!  The MacOS was never intended to support
   multitasking, let alone protected address spaces.

All things considered, I think we're doing ok.

That doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to see a protected OS on the Mac.  
I would.  It's just that once you had it, you wouldn't have what we think 
of as the "MacOS" anymore.

__________________________________________________________________________
                                Paul Snively
                      Macintosh Developer Technical Support
                             Apple Computer, Inc.

chewy@apple.com

Just because I work for Apple Computer, Inc. doesn't mean that I believe 
what they believe, or vice-versa.
__________________________________________________________________________