mwm@VIOLET.BERKELEY.EDU.UUCP (02/26/87)
And were we go again..... From mhorne@tekfdi.UUCP (Mike Horne): >> >Low-end home computers (those which have 68K's being the _topic_ of >> >this newsgroup). >> Note: Anything having to do with the design of a computer system around >> a 680X0 is relevent to this newsgroup (MMUs, DRAM, etc.). Ahem. From the list of lists: INFO-68K@UCBVAX Mailing list for users of OS's capable of running on small 68000 systems, primarly CP/M-68K. Related systems (OS/9-68K, etc.) and topics welcome. Archives are kept on host SIMTEL20 in file: PS:<ARCHIVES.68K>68K-ARCHIV.TXT They are available via ANONYMOUS FTP from SIMTEL20 for those with TCP/IP access to the Internet. All requests to be added to or deleted from this list, problems, questions, etc., should be sent to Info-68K-Request@UCBVAX. Coordinator: Mike Meyer <mwm%ucbopal@BERKELEY.EDU> The coordinaters address is out of date. It should be mwm@violet.berkeley.edu. The old one still works, though. Note the words "small 68000 systems." Those currently available don't have MMU's. Remember: never trust a computer you can't throw across the room! On the off chance you weren't aware, mod.computers.68k is the USENet name for info-68K. Your statement is accurate for comp.sys.m68k. In fact, to prevent people on that group from gripeing about discussion of small machines was one of the reasons for creating info-68k. >> Well, then you get a 68000 with 1MB of DRAM, no VM, a 700 dollar 20MB HD, >> etc. If this suits you, fine. BUT, if you want more ram, VM, more power, >> etc., it is being developed NOW. You gotta wait. I'm totally happy with I'd rather have what I've got: 68010, 2.5MB dram (yes, it's on 256Kb chips. It's going to go to 4.5 in the next month or so. I mean, for $150, who can resist?), no VM. Since I'm planning on playing with LISP, VM would be a major performance hit. Going to 8.5Meg (or maybe more) of real is a _lot_ more attractive than adding an MMU. >> But you would never get me to go back >> to something without an MMU. Put it this way: Once you have tasted the >> soup, you don't want the dry toast. Uh, sorry, but I make my living hacking on systems with MMUs. And VM. On those systems, I miss shared memory, shared libraries, streams, real IPC, lightweight processes (tasks, if you want to be accurate), dynamically mountable device drivers, etc., etc., etc. >> I agree. Use what you have. But realized that the next generation of >> machines will have VM. The next generation is just around the corner. If "just around the corner" means 1+ years, I agree. At that time, I'll think about trading in the current box for something better. Note that better != bigger&faster, thought that's to be hoped for. <mike