Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!steinmetz!davidsen
From: davidsen@steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 80386 vs. 68030
Message-ID: <12774@steinmetz.ge.com>
Date: 9 Dec 88 17:58:40 GMT
References: <3283@mipos3.intel.com> <6360@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: General Electric CRD, Schenectady, NY
Lines: 22

In article <6360@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green) writes:

| Re: 68030 vs. 80386 -- what I'd love to see on the '386 would be a
| Multics-like system. The hardware looks so Multics-like... seems a
| shame to stuff Unix onto it, Unix which was designed for linear
| address spaces, PDP-11s and Vaxen.... Unix in a single segment isn't
| exactly taking advantage of the '386's best parts. Unix and the 68030,
| on the other hand, were practically made for each other....

  I thought of Multics when I first saw the 386. Come on someone,
Multics is certified B2 secure, and it's written in a high level
language. Can't someone see the market for Multic/386? Could it really
be harder to port than UNIX?

  If I could get Multics I think I'd go out and buy another 386 just to
run it. I had a chance at a 645 (the original Multics machine) for the
cost of the copper, but I didn't have a place to put it, and I couldn't
afford a new house and a divorce at the same time ;-)
-- 
	bill davidsen		(wedu@ge-crd.arpa)
  {uunet | philabs}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me