Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!decwrl!sun!cmcmanis
From: cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis)
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari16,net.micro.amiga,net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: 68000 Memory Managment
Message-ID: <6657@sun.uucp>
Date: Thu, 28-Aug-86 14:24:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.6657
Posted: Thu Aug 28 14:24:15 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 29-Aug-86 05:46:02 EDT
References: <508@elmgate.UUCP> <64@mit-prep.ARPA> <653@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> <270@dmsd.UUCP> <7578@tekecs.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 21
Xref: mnetor net.micro.atari16:1758 net.micro.amiga:4432 net.micro.68k:1171

In article <7578@tekecs.UUCP> jans@tekecs.UUCP (Jan Steinman) writes :
> 
> I don't quite buy that.  Look at the #1 business machine -- what kind of MMU
> does it have?  The Atari has just about the same features as the IBM PC --
> including lack of reasonable system software.  The Amiga at least made an
> attempt to make up for the lack of an MMU with good system software.
> -- 
> :::::: Artificial   Intelligence   Machines   ---   Smalltalk   Project ::::::
> :::::: Jan Steinman		Box 1000, MS 60-405	(w)503/685-2956 ::::::
> :::::: tektronix!tekecs!jans	Wilsonville, OR 97070	(h)503/657-7703 ::::::

Two points here, one neither the Atari nor the 8088 based PC try to multitask.
The AT has an MMU built into the '286. Lets not debate this issue yet again
(the last time the consensus was "Multitasking is a lot safer with an MMU,
however with clever system software and reasonably well behaved programs
it is not required.")

-- 
--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis   BIX: cmcmanis  ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.