Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25727

Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++)

From	Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++)
Date	2011-02-09 00:15 -0500
Organization	albasani.net
Message-ID	<iit7s1$pa2$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink)
References	(7 earlier) <4d50b4dc$0$32795$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <iiqg8a$b4$1@news.albasani.net> <4d50da6e$0$32794$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <iiqrin$458$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d521cac$0$32796$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>

Show all headers | View raw

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> Nobody seriously used that stuff, because none of it was of any use.

Esmond Pitt wrote:
> Windows 95 used it, ditto 98, and every version of NT. Ditto NetWare 4.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> The only OS designed to try to make use of it, OS/2, flopped.

Esmond Pitt wrote:
> For that reason?

That quote is out of context, but if "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" was saying that use 
of clever Intel tricks like hardware multitasking and privilege rings were 
used only by OS/2 (is that what he said?  I missed his post.), the other OSes 
you cite aren't the only ones, either.  QNX, for example, was doing that on 
the '286, and they're still very much in business, too.

They also leveraged the segmented architecture quite nicely.  Typically, 
multiple instances of the same program shared the code segment and only 
allocated individual data segments.  We put three simultaneous users on 
terminals into the same application on a '386 with 2 MB of RAM and it ran like 
a bat out of hell and never felt pinched for memory.

-- 
Lew
Ceci n'est pas une fenêtre.
.___________.
|###] | [###|
|##/  | *\##|
|#/ * |   \#|
|#----|----#|
||    |  * ||
|o *  |    o|
|_____|_____|
|===========|

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-06 00:15 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:55 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:15 -0500
      Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-02-09 15:48 +1100
        Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-09 00:15 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:13 -0500
        Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-11 13:11 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> - 2011-02-08 09:00 -0500
      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
      Re: Java vs C++ Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-02-07 18:58 +0100
        Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:59 -0500
        Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 15:59 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:09 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 15:57 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 16:00 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:07 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 21:22 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 09:26 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-06 14:30 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-06 20:42 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-07 21:03 -0800
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:51 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Wojtek <nowhere@a.com> - 2011-02-07 20:43 -0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 12:54 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:08 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 15:10 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 19:57 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:51 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 09:24 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 09:28 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 15:20 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-02-06 10:55 -0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Pitch <mail@fake.info> - 2011-02-05 13:01 +0100
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-06 01:24 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-05 09:38 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-05 09:32 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Jef <e70838@gmail.com> - 2011-02-09 04:34 -0800
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 21:12 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 14:53 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 09:30 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-02-05 15:02 +0100
  Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-05 10:49 -0500

csiph-web