> My pet peve is the IBM PC when launched was clocked at a rather poor
> 4.77mhz when most of the s100, multibus and generally everyone else
> that went with 16bits were looking for 8mhz or faster if possible.
> It saved a few dollars but not enough. At least DEC had a z80 in
> there to also do IO (instead of the IOC).
Jep, Even the Z80 was at 6MHz at this time - But to be
honest we have to agree that the basic design of the PC
was just intended ans a more flexible terminal, and this
basic design was enhanced for the PC...
>< P.S.: The hate-segmentation-rantig against the x86 also drives
>< me mad - the segmentation sceme used is a very good compromise
>< between usability and performance. Loosing up to 15 Bytes
>< per segment isn't realy a drawback compared to granularities
>< of 4 or 8K today ...
> To me segmentation was just another bag on the side to get 16bits to
> address more.
Jep right, and a very andsome way to deliver relocable adressing
and simple memory management.
> The other half is that MMU granularity makes sense for its time but with
> modern OSs eating megabytes for the kernel Even segments don't allow
> enough.
:))))
Unix and MS ...
H.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Received on Tue Oct 20 1998 - 08:01:09 BST