Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #26177
| Path | csiph.com!eeepc.pasdenom.info!news.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.albasani.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | [OT] Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) |
| Date | Mon, 07 Feb 2011 23:19:38 -0500 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Lines | 29 |
| Message-ID | <iiqg8a$b4$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | <iijbfr$pb2$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iijrj2$i0g$1@news.eternal-september.org> <iil6on$qvo$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d4e7634$0$81475$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <iinje0$7j3$7@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d4f55ba$0$23758$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <iiqbe9$q89$4@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d50b4dc$0$32795$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 8bit |
| X-Trace | news.albasani.net mrqWeOnKti7Zno8oHhwxA4Ro8Z3oInLthZuxboOagKGfWnKn4lRD1pJ3I3bLzWdIArDNL/cZBex0LrtH1RMtUQ== |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Tue, 8 Feb 2011 04:19:23 +0000 (UTC) |
| In-Reply-To | <4d50b4dc$0$32795$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:vdhChpZYDXf4ZNTN76W2FjbNSV8= |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 |
| Injection-Info | news.albasani.net; logging-data="uYWrVDHUEjbC6pPYVzSJPCDhKHXfq9/rTMqF+77dQSwjzbL8l8CnfMezeah9kfdSScr32903NDpK6eZ/SUQblYrOFyEgCqFxRfhtAOWfyZc5DX2np60A1U0KU9wpm0ys"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net" |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:26177 |
Show key headers only | View raw
"Lawrence D'Oliveiro" wrote: >> DOS/Windows is the only reason 8086/80286 segmented architectures became >> popular. Esmond Pitt wrote: > Another blanket statement ex cathedra. > > That's not what the guys at Intel think, or the guys at Motorola either. They > will tell you that despite its ugliness at the point of code generation the > Intel segmented architecture yielded very significant cost and performance > benefits that basically drove Motorola out of the market. Intel brought quite a few innovations in quite early, many of which went nearly unnoticed for a while. The '286 and up have privilege rings and support for multitasking in the hardware, for example. Only a couple of OSes really used that stuff back then. -- Lew Ceci n'est pas une fenêtre. .___________. |###] | [###| |##/ | *\##| |#/ * | \#| |#----|----#| || | * || |o * | o| |_____|_____| |===========|
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar
Re: Java vs C++ Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-02-08 14:13 +1100
Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 20:31 +1300
Re: [OT] Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-02-08 16:53 +1100
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 20:32 +1300
[OT] Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-07 23:19 -0500
csiph-web