Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!guest
From: guest@ccivax.UUCP (What's in a name ?)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: Re: Memory Management w/o MMU"
Message-ID: <336@ccivax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Dec-85 22:14:33 EST
Article-I.D.: ccivax.336
Posted: Wed Dec  4 22:14:33 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Dec-85 04:43:25 EST
References: <370@caip.RUTGERS.EDU> <371@sdcc13.UUCP> <618@edison.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Telephony Systems Group,  Rochester NY
Lines: 30

> > GET THIS THRU YOUR HEADS OR TAKE AN OPERATING SYSTEMS CLASS:
> > 
> > THE BARE MINIMUM NEEDED FOR MULTITASKING ARE PROCESSOR
> > INTERRUPTS OCCURING AT INTERVALS, AND AN INTERRUPT HANDLER.
> > 
> > 
> > Larry J. McCaughey
> 
> This is true but, it is also like saying all you need to make a fire
> is two wooden sticks. 
> It is unfortunate with all its sophisticated
> hardware that the amiga didn't use a system that would provide inter-task
> protection and I certainly wouldn't have complained about virtual memory.
> 
> David Albrecht

It's Ironic that that the Argument used to support putting the OS in ROM
(Both ST and AMIGA) is considered irrelevant when discussing an MMU.
Amiga contains a complicated WCS (Write Control Store) to manage the
kickstart disk, yet assumes that memory protection between applications
is not needed.

AMIGA - Don't put the OS in ROM or WCS, just put an MMU between the 68000
and the rest of the RAM.

MULTI-TASKING WITHOUT AN MMU IS LIKE DRIVING A CAR WITH NO BRAKES.

Opinions are mine, but I'm giving them up for adoption.

rb@ccivax