Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!amdcad!ames!mailrus!iuvax!pur-ee!pur-phy!sho
From: sho@pur-phy (Sho Kuwamoto)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Personal Nightmare (Re: When will MacOS get virtual memory?)
Message-ID: <1519@pur-phy>
Date: 10 Oct 88 04:15:38 GMT
References: <5624@zodiac.UUCP> <76000290@p.cs.uiuc.edu> <815@etive.ed.ac.uk>
Reply-To: sho@newton.physics.purdue.edu.UUCP (Sho Kuwamoto)
Organization: Purdue Univ. Physics Dept., W. Lafayette, IN
Lines: 28

In article <815@etive.ed.ac.uk> nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes:
>[Macs cos $3000 in UK, etc.]  I keep having this horrible
>fear of an announcement by Apple:
>   "We are committed to memory management on Macintoshes.  The new
>System n.0 will run on a 68020-based machine only. In line with our
>past upgrade policies, we will sell 68020 boards to SE owners for
>$not-much. We consider the 68000-based Mac to be obselete. The minimal
>Macintosh is a 68020-based one. The Mac Plus is a bad dream. We will
>not support it. Future software will not run on it."
>   Mummy, mummy, make the bad dream go away.... :-)
>
>[disclaimer: I'm not suggesting for a moment that anything like this is in
> the works. It's just a fear I have.]

I *am* suggesting (but only for a moment) that something like this is
in the works.  There was a timeline in either MacUser or MacWorld
about what's in store for the system software.  Now, I don't remember
what it was about exactly, and I can't seem to find the right issue
(if anyone else can figure out which issue this is, I'd like to read
this.)  so take this all with a grain of salt.  For all I know, it
could have been one of those what-the-editors-think-is-in-store-
though-we-know-even-less-than-you-do stories.  But I distinctly
remember that after some time (maybe a year) they were planning on
completely moving over to a 32 bit architecture with real memory
management, and everyone with a 68000 would get frozen into some old
system like the folks without the Plus ROMs.  Pretty scary.  

-Sho