Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!inuxc!inuxf!matt
From: matt@inuxf.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Hardware Dependance
Message-ID: <228@inuxf.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Feb-87 08:33:59 EST
Article-I.D.: inuxf.228
Posted: Sat Feb  7 08:33:59 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Feb-87 06:29:14 EST
References: <275@ihnp3.UUCP> <459@moncol.UUCP> <2529@well.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Consumer Products, Indianapolis
Lines: 16

> My apologies if this is a dumb question, by why the design decision to
> make MINIX so hardware-dependant. Why wasn't the BIOS used? Does the
> BIOS not provide enough functionality? If the problem is just speed,
> why not write a slower version for those of us whose chips don't have
> the right pedigree? The hardware dependance strikes at one of the
> basic tentents of UNIX philosophy.
> 
> 
> -- 
> The opinions expressed are my own, but you're welcome to share them.
> Harry Henderson (freelance technical editor/writer).

It seems to me that since MINIX was designed as an educational tool,
it may have been thought to be more educational to be able to see actual
driver code instead of a BIOS call using a software interrupt.  Not much
to be learned there except the inefficiencies of MSDOS lower layers :-).