Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!gatech!purdue!decwrl!hplabs!sdcrdcf!csun!polyslo!dorourke From: dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David O'Rourke) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: FullWrite Professional Message-ID: <3045@polyslo.UUCP> Date: 2 Jun 88 23:28:37 GMT References: <8805172016.AA09499@decwrl.dec.com> <2730@polyslo.UUCP> <241@pedro.UUCP> Reply-To: dorourke@polyslo.UUCP (David O'Rourke) Organization: Cal Poly State University -- San Luis Obispo Lines: 25 In article <241@pedro.UUCP> benjamin_kuo@pedro.UUCP (Benjamin Kuo) writes: > I recall someone telling me once that the problem with the Macintosh is >that all the applications load EVERYTHING in a data file into memory, and >swamping the RAM. On the contrary, most other computers make do by >loading each part in one at a time, when you need the data. Well as far as I know this is wrong. As on most personal computers it is the programmer that decides, what, how much, and when Data is read into memory. Now since you don't have virtual memory which allows programmers to "pretend" they have lots of memory. Most software that tends to get written reads all of the data into memory so that it can easily be manipulated, otherwise the programer has to figure out how to deal with segmenting the data. And the computers that you refer to aren't considered personal computers. If you think the Mac is bad just take a look at MS-Dos, it's even worse than the Macintosh at dealing with memory. There's no support for heaps, relocatable objects, code segments, ectt. Although the 80X86 series processor's all have wonderful support for these concepts, none of the 80X86 series features are in MS-Dos. Looking at the Macintosh Memory Model is should be possible to extend the OS so that it does VM and keep some compatibility. -- David M. O'Rourke Disclaimer: I don't represent the school. All opinions are mine!