It was thus said that the Great ben franchuk once stated:
>
> Cameron Kaiser wrote:
> >>In hindsight we now know that 16 bits is too small a
> >>addressing range for a general purpose byte/word cpu's
> >
> >
> > I can't believe someone actually said this on *this* list. I think I'll go
> > throw out all my 6502-based systems since they're so pointless for general
> > purpose computing.
>
> I did not say General purpose computing can't be done,
> just that it is a very small amount of memory for most
> user programs. It is really hard work to have a useful
> programs written on the small 8 bit machines, and fit
> in 32k or 48k of memory incuding the OS.
Useful in what context? I wrote nearly every paper for high school and
college, plus a humor column [1] on an 8-bit computer [2], and I had a 2nd
cousin (Mom's cousin) that wrote a few books on an 8-bit computer [3].
Okay, you might not be able to effectively run more than one application at
a time, but that might not be such a *bad* thing, if you want to get work
done 8-)
> PS use 6809's rather than 6502's. :)
No argument there.
-spc (First assembly language was 6809 ... )
[1]
http://www.conman.org/people/spc/writings/murphy/
[2] Color Computer 2 with 64K RAM.
[3] Northstar, probably running CP/M. I remember using it to play
games writtin in BASIC on it.
Received on Sun Nov 24 2002 - 11:04:00 GMT