Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!cory.Berkeley.EDU!navas
From: navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why are Amigaoids hell bent on proving the Amiga is better ?
Message-ID: <14343@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 30 Jun 91 18:50:34 GMT
References: <g!3H=4=!@cs.psu.edu>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU
Lines: 32

In article <g!3H=4=!@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>Actually, there aren't any Amigas that have memory protection.  There

Bzzzt.  Cmdre has machines that have "memory protection" in that whenever
memory unused in the system is addressed, you get a report.  The enforcer
is, of course, available at any ftp site.  [The enforcer != Guardian Angel]
That info was recently discussed in csa.programmer.

Depends on your definition of "memory protection."  Kind of like your definition
of "multitasking", eh?  :)

>with memory protection is it?  Amigas don't have virtual memory
>either.  Even Macintoys and Windows 3.0 have this.

Bzzzt^2.  Amigas DO have virtual memory.  You will need to buy a separate
harddrive controller, and _currently_ it's available only in Germany --
of course that's where the larger market is, so this makes sense.

I had no idea Microsoft was selling hardware nowadays. :)

Of course, when you have a user interface that doesn't take up 4-8 megs of
memory, there's not the pressing need, eh.  [Not a flame, believe it or not]

And, of course, neither Windows nor Macs have memory protection, and there's
even less reason for the Mac than there is for the Amiga.  [IMHO]
Not that that's an excuse.  But *must* we start that argument again?

>-Mike

David Navas                                   navas@cory.berkeley.edu
	2.0 :: "You can't have your cake and eat it too."
Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus