Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!nuchat!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Historical architectural advances?? Message-ID: Date: 14 Oct 90 11:31:49 GMT References: <8139@scolex.sco.COM> <1990Oct13.035313.174@ingres.Ingres.COM> <1990Oct13.200414.3523@motaus.sps.mot.com> Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 11 In article <1990Oct13.200414.3523@motaus.sps.mot.com> phil@motaus.sps.mot.com (Phil Brownfield) writes: > In article <1990Oct13.035313.174@ingres.Ingres.COM> jpk@ingres.com (Jon Krueger) writes: > >VAX processor speed wasn't impressive. Ever. Its large flat virtual > >address spaces were. ^^^^^^^ > The MC68000 supports a 16MB linear address map. [in 1981]... The MC68000 is a great CPU. It's a lot later (in computer generation terms) than the VAX, though. Plus, it doesn't support virtual memory worth a damn... it wasn't even up to PDP-11 standards there... remember the problems with the Bourne shell which assumed memory faults were recoverable? -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U` peter@ferranti.com