Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccicpg!harald
From: harald@ccicpg.UUCP ( Harald Milne)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: The REAL problem is the nature of personal computers.
Message-ID: <8870@ccicpg.UUCP>
Date: 11 Jan 88 09:55:25 GMT
References: <7967@g.ms.uky.edu> <1363@sugar.UUCP> <8692@ccicpg.UUCP> <8021@g.ms.uky.edu>
Organization: CCI CPD, Irvine CA
Lines: 72


	Please everybody, this is not a discussion of OS religion, just
some random thoughts about the future of the Amiga.

In article <8021@g.ms.uky.edu>, sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes:
> In article <557@gethen.UUCP> farren@gethen.UUCP (Michael J. Farren) writes:
> >In article <8692@ccicpg.UUCP> harald@ccicpg.UUCP ( Harald Milne) writes:
> >>Then you need a bloated OS like UNIX to support users that are not on
> >>your machine to compete with your "resources".
> >
> >The UNIX kernel on the machine I'm at right now (an AT&T 3b1) amounts
> >to exactly 168,707 bytes.  This is bloated?
> 

	I was not refering to the size of the kernel, but the amount of disk
space used. If you are talking about a reasonable implementation of UNIX, I
would say 50meg barely scratches the surface. Look at the Mac II with AUX,
80meg and 5 left for you. 

	There is another problem with implementing UNIX, and that is disk
performance. UNIX HAS to use a hard disk, and depends greatly on access
times for performance, something that doesn't come cheap. (Well processor
performance matters also!)

	Add to this, process context. Everytime a process is switched,
caches are blown away. A problem that does not exist on the Amiga.

	In 5 years, I still have not seen a cheap and reasonable performance 
UNIX implemention for less than $5000. Im still waiting, I love UNIX, and
would love to have it at home.

	And there is yet another problem, you HAVE to have a tape drive.
How else can one reasonably manage megabytes of storage.

	More expense.

	In summary, I don't feel UNIX is reasonable for the home computing
market in general. It's just too expensive to implement. And its overkill
for a machine that's supposed to be a personal computer, not an 80 user
supermicro UNIX system.

> I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that a VM Unix could be written
> whose executable size is less than the Amiga's existing ROM Kernel (192K).

	I don't think that's reasonable. The Amiga's OS doesn't exactly pick its
nose running graphics, sound, windows, and all the other stuff. There is a 
hell of a lot of stuff going on here, that would have to be added on top of a
VM implementation. And that's if it's added.

	As I have stated before, I have no objection to seeing UNIX on the
Amiga.

	What I would like to see is backward compatability of some sort, not
unlike what Apple is trying to do with the Mac II. In this respect, I believe
the Amiga has a huge advantage, namely addressing the issues of multiple
CPU architectures. The Amiga is blessed in this respect. (Thanks CBM!)
Since CBM was wise enough to address the issues of the differences between
the 68000 and the 68020, an Amiga implemention of UNIX could be much less
painful and more compatible than the current Mac II scenario.

	And all this silly talk about disk space, I finally came to the
conclusion that I need at least 50 megabytes to "use" the Amiga comfortably.

	Thats today! 8^)

	Live long and prosper.

> Sean
-- 
Work: Computer Consoles Inc. (CCI), Advanced Development Group (ADG)
      Irvine, CA (RISCy business! Home of the CCI POWER 6/32)
UUCP: uunet!ccicpg!harald