Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nuchat!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: The Next Generation Message-ID: <1217@sugar.UUCP> Date: Thu, 3-Dec-87 13:47:24 EST Article-I.D.: sugar.1217 Posted: Thu Dec 3 13:47:24 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 9-Dec-87 07:29:36 EST References: <2785@megaron.arizona.edu> <17218@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> <582@zippy.eecs.umich.edu> Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX Lines: 51 Keywords: MMU paging swapping In article <582@zippy.eecs.umich.edu>, pla@zippy.eecs.umich.edu (Paul Anderson) writes: > Peter, I understand your points about paging, swapping and VM, but I'd > like you to understand my point that anything less than virtual > memory+paging+interprocess protection is a hack... Well, you apparently don't understand it, because I have never said I don't want interprocess protection. I also would like paging if I can safely turn it off (not lock a process into memory... turn it off completely) when I want to run real-time (like, in a video game). During program devlopment and for some soft real-time work it is an absolute win. > My experience is that the Amiga is about 1/4 the effective system > speed of my Apollo DN3000. An awful lot of this has to do with the > quality of the software on the system, including compilers, debuggers, > unix-type utilities, and other related things. An awful lot has to do with the fact that you're using a faster CPU with a faster bus and a faster hard disk, and you're not using TRIPOS. TRIPOS is a bug come to life, and has nothing to do with VM. It's an orthogonal issue. > Anyone that thinks that > the quality of the software on the Amiga even remotely approaches the > quality of the system software on the Apollo really should try porting > 10 or 15 megabytes of software to both before claiming it as fact. I never said nor hinted this. The quality of UNIX software and tools is awesome. Apollo's O/S seems to be in the ballpark. > Your comment about software breaking without MEMF_PUBLIC is well taken, > also. Someone earlier (lost the article, sorry) mentioned that message > passing OS are wonderful. Well, they are, but things like MEMF_PUBLIC > are part of the price we paid for AmigaDOS. I don't see where MEMF_PUBLIC is such a problem. How much of your code is public? What's the chance that in a protected system a bad pointer will hit it before the much larger proportion of protected memory? > My personal suggestion is for Commodore to forget trying to slowly add > virtual memory to AmigaDOS... freeze what we know as AmigaDOS... > [and get AmigaDOS emulator under UNIX, or UNIX/AmigaDOS under some > sort of combined system]. Nope. Get UNIX onto the Amiga, and then let people run with it while you get back to work on fixing AmigaDos. It's got advantages over UNIX. Real-time. Works with floppies only. Etc... Merge them when you KNOW you can do it right. -- -- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.