Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.hardware:11231 comp.sys.mac.system:5597
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!stanford.edu!neon.Stanford.EDU!pescadero.Stanford.EDU!philip
From: philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick)
Subject: Re: A Classic Dead End?
Message-ID: <1991May17.171739.18751@neon.Stanford.EDU>
Keywords: Classic,System 7.0
Sender: news@neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Reply-To: philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
Organization: Stanford University
References:  <1991May17.153503.21947@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 17 May 1991 17:17:39 GMT
Lines: 19

In article <1991May17.153503.21947@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, bgrubb@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu writes:
|> Another solution would be the realization of a rumor I heard a year ago:
|> One Sys 7.0 was stable Apple would come out with a 1 meg ROM chip that
|> allow Sys 7.0 to run with only 1 meg of RAM.
Assuming there's another 512K of stuff currently in the System that's
stable enough to put in ROM... Remember, we are talking about stuff that
lands up in the System heap, not just anything that may currently be part
of the System.

I think the better long-term solution is a Classic/30 upgrade. I wouldn't
be surprised if the 4M limit is a hardware limit based on the number
of address lines actually used - I believe this was the reason for this
limit on the original Macs and the Plus.

Do you really want to run lots of big programs simulataneously on a machine
as slow as a Classic?
-- 
Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu