Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site k.cs.cmu.edu
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim
From: tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: UNIX for the Mac? (Don't laugh...)
Message-ID: <686@k.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Sun, 1-Dec-85 03:28:53 EST
Article-I.D.: k.686
Posted: Sun Dec  1 03:28:53 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 3-Dec-85 08:44:26 EST
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking
Lines: 18

Does anyone know any strong reason that a 2 Megabyte Mac with a couple of
twenty meg hard disks could not be a perfectly good UNIX workstation?  I
can't think of any major obstacles to, say, a 4.2bsd port, other than the
lack of memory management.  Given the apparent ease of doing HyperDrive-like
hardware hacks, I don't see why a memory management unit could not be added
with relative ease and low cost.

The UNIX Mac might also be set up to run Macintosh applications as a special
type of process, setting up a Mac environment (which just means supporting
all the traps) at process start.

I know it would never be a Sun III, but I think it could be quite worthwhile.

Any flames, comments, suggestions, etc., to me or the net.
-=-
Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot, CMU Center for Art and Technology
tim@k.cs.cmu.edu       | uucp: {seismo,decwrl,ucbvax,etc.}!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim
CompuServe: 74176,1360 | CMU. Tomorrow's networking nightmares -- today!