Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!agate!darkstar!ucscb.UCSC.EDU!unknown
From: unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Multitasking on a II
Message-ID: <10063@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Date: 13 Dec 90 08:11:53 GMT
References: <14720@smoke.brl.mil> <10563@ucrmath.ucr.edu> <&RF^T6-@rpi.edu>
Sender: usenet@darkstar.ucsc.edu
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing
Lines: 26


In article <&RF^T6-@rpi.edu> floyd@pawl.rpi.edu (Patrick J Wetmore) writes:
>Bull. The apple iigs (curse its evil presence. I hate hate hate it. Infernal
>lousy piece of... growl snarl.) has no protected memory, and no virtualling
>hardware. Any machine can multitask, but without the proper memory 
>architecture the thing will be completely useless. Plus, the damnable
>thing is so slow. It plods.

	I realize that this is going to be a "I think, I'm pretty sure"
type of post (i.e. I'm not positive of any of my facts)... but bear with me.

	I believe that the original IBM PC can run Xenix... At least some
of the "lower" IBM PCs can, I'm sure of that...

	And I'm also under the impression that IBM PCs have nothing in
the way of memory protection... So since they seem to run Xenix well, it
seems that blows your argument out of the water.

	BESIDES, a 68881 card (that will actually fit in the 65816
connector space) is being built and that'll deal with all of the protected
memory problems...

-- 
/Apple II(GS) Forever! unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu MAIL ME FOR INFO ABOUT CHEAP CDs\
|WRITE TO ORIGIN ABOUT ULTIMA VI //e and IIGS! Mail me for addresses, & info. | 
\   "Dammit Bev, is it you inside or is it the clown?" -IT by Stephen King    /