Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site ism780c.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim
From: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: 386 Family Products
Message-ID: <132@ism780c.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Dec-85 21:09:24 EST
Article-I.D.: ism780c.132
Posted: Tue Dec 10 21:09:24 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Dec-85 06:40:47 EST
References: <129@intelca> <4400130@uiucdcsb> <6185@utzoo.UUCP> <433@ecn-pc.UUCP>
Reply-To: tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith)
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica, CA
Lines: 22

In article <433@ecn-pc.UUCP> mdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Mike D McEvoy) writes:
>2) High level languages make this problem transparent to the user.
>   The majority of the free world refuses to use asssembler other than
>   when necessary and rarely does a module exceed 64k.  

How about data?  Data can easily exceed 64k.  And high level languages
do not make the segmentation transparent to the user.  The only deficiency
of the 80?86 that a high level language can hide is the small number of
registers.

The 80386 still has too few registers, but at least the registers can be
pretty much used for whatever the programmer wants, unlike the 80[<3]6.

I wish Motorola would put an MMU on the 68020.  The real nice thing
about the 386 is that it has a real MMU, and there is almost no way
that a hardware designed can build a 386 system that I can't run UNIX
on.  With the 68020, the hardware guys can quite easily screw up
memory management.
-- 
Tim Smith       sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim
			  ^
			  ^-- Not ISM780C, ignore the header!