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!