Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25917
| From | Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer, comp.os.os2.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) |
| Date | 2011-02-09 07:46 -0500 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Message-ID | <iiu29i$tu2$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | (9 earlier) <4d50da6e$0$32794$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <iiqrin$458$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d521cac$0$32796$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <iit7s1$pa2$1@news.albasani.net> <iit8db$m1a$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Lew wrote: >> 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. Sulfide Eater wrote: > QNX? That's even more obscure than OS/2 is! How is still in business and thriving more obscure than historic only and no longer used? > Fact is, nothing with non-micoscopic market share used those features of the > 80286. That was essentially what I said to start off this sub-thread: "Only a couple of OSes really used that stuff back then." Glad to see agreement in this often contentious newsgroup. -- 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
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-09 00:23 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-09 16:03 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-02-10 06:29 -0800
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Heike Svensson <hsvensson.1093x1_q@hotmail.nospam.com.please> - 2011-02-10 09:35 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-02-10 17:21 -0800
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-02-10 21:58 +1100
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-02-10 17:23 -0800
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-12 05:40 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-02-10 06:28 -0800
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-10 09:32 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Heike Svensson <hsvensson.1093x1_q@hotmail.nospam.com.please> - 2011-02-13 11:04 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-10 07:00 -0500
Re: Troll warning Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-09 17:02 -0500
Re: Troll warning Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-13 11:40 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-02-09 07:43 -0800
Re: Troll warning Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-09 16:29 -0500
Re: Troll warning "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-02-09 13:52 -0800
Re: Troll warning Nigel Wade <nmw-news@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2011-02-09 13:12 +0000
Re: Troll warning Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-09 08:22 -0500
Re: Troll warning Sulfide Eater <zaxx1108@example.com> - 2011-02-09 16:28 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-09 07:46 -0500
Re: Intel architecture (Was: Java vs C++) "tholen@antispam.ham" <tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu> - 2011-02-09 07:41 -0800
csiph-web