Tony Duell wrote:
>
> > Especially since the TRS-80 Model 16, with the Xenix OS partly done
> > by Microsoft, multitasked (and multiusered) quite nicely even with
> > only 256K of RAM. Not to mention the Color Computer running OS-9 in
> > 64K.
>
> Or the early versions of PDP11 unix which ran in a 28kW machine, I think.
> Or, indeed, Tripos, which certainly runs in a 28kW PDP11.
>
> One of the smallest multitasking systems I've seen was the I/O processor
> on the PERQ 2's. It was a Z80 with 4K ROM and 16K RAM, but said ROM
> contained essentially a cooperatively multitasking kernel. Some tasks
> were in ROM, others were loaded into RAM. OK, so the user never realised
> what was going on, but that doesn't alter the fact that it was there :-)
Sounds neat. I guess I've got to try and find one. Are there any
here on the rebellious side of the Atlantic? (I know _nothing_ of
these machines beyond your messages, if I saw them advertised the
references went into brain cells that have been foully murdered).
--
Ward Griffiths
They say that politics makes strange bedfellows.
Of course, the main reason they cuddle up is to screw somebody else.
Michael Flynn, _Rogue Star_
Received on Wed Jun 10 1998 - 22:33:02 BST