Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!kessner!david From: david@kessner.denver.co.us (David Kessner) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: 8-bit death Message-ID: <1991May3.043704.10066@kessner.denver.co.us> Date: 3 May 91 04:37:04 GMT References: <1991May1.120729.13618@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1991May2.013735.6365@kessner.denver.co.us> <1991May2.105802.26053@sugar.hackercorp.com> Organization: Kessner, Inc. Lines: 47 In article <1991May2.105802.26053@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >> Nothing you mentioned is dependant on the magic 8 or 16 bit numbers. > >What's magic. I'm talking about memory limitations. The IBM-PC originally >shipped with the same 64K CP/M ran under. > >> The things that you mention are more dependant on MMU's rather than anything >> else-- like the 'number of bits'. > >It's, like all other distinctions, a tag. There are commonalities among 8-bit >CPUs, 16-bit ones, and 32-bit ones. So, using your definitions for 8, 16, and 32 bit OS's (not quoted here), why should we use 'bits' as the unit of measurement-- since it is more than a little misleading. Perhapse another term should be 'generation', 'level', etc. For instance, a Level 1 OS would be nothing more than a program loader where a level 42 would do everything UNIX does now, with support for multi-CPU's, 64-bit address space, etc... This would be _MUCH_ better since your definitions have absolutely nothing to do with the number of bits in anything. >>>But I do equate Ultrix with UNIX. In fact, anything that provides the basic >>>35 system calls from V7 days is UNIX. > >>Ultrix (on the PDP-11) was in many respects a 16 bit operating system. > >Ultrix ran on the VAX. Were you thinking of Version 7 UNIX? Swapping UNIX >systems are indeed 16-bit. Not surprising... the PDP-11 is a 16-bit machine. > >But Ultrix is DEC's name for their VAX UNIX. They never shipped a UNIX for >the PDP-11. Why don't you check your facts and try again? Why don't _YOU_ check your facts. I have programmed a PDP-11/23 and a MicroPDP-11/something, both running _Ultrix_. And I mean Ultrix. It says Ultrix when it boots, on the manuals, on the order forms, and many other places. C'mon, give me a break! >Peter da Silva. `-_-' >. -- David Kessner - david@kessner.denver.co.us | do { 1135 Fairfax, Denver CO 80220 (303) 377-1801 (p.m.) | . . . If you cant flame MS-DOS, who can you flame? | } while( jones);