Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!enea!tut!santra!jmunkki
From: jmunkki@santra.HUT.FI (Juri Munkki)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: LSC 3.0 memory...it's not their fault!
Message-ID: <14138@santra.UUCP>
Date: 30 Jun 88 19:56:40 GMT
References: <242@hodge.UUCP> <1658@iscuva.ISCS.COM>
Sender: jmunkki@santra.UUCP
Reply-To: jmunkki@santra.UUCP (Juri Munkki)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Lines: 22

In article <1658@iscuva.ISCS.COM> jimc@iscuva.ISCS.COM (Jim Cathey) writes:
>Of course, I am not proposing that VM could just drop into the Mac OS for a
>paltry memory fee.  There are a lot of technical issues to solve (unless you
>want VM with no intertask protection -- that would be quite a bit easier).

Of course that is what I want and what I think most people would like. Since
the Mac currently has absolutely no protection between applications, there
would be no harm from a virtual system without protection. I estimate that it
would take a good Mac programmer about a week to write a beta version and
about two months to make it a product.

Tell me why it can't be done. It wouldn't hurt apple's image to be able to
advertise that the Mac has virtual memory.

I already suggested this earlier and got no replies. Are MMUs harder to find
than 1M DRAMs?

Juri Munkki
jmunkki@santra.hut.fi
jmunkki@fingate.bitnet

P.S. Give me a MMU and the manuals and I'll write a swapper.