HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams)
Subject: Re: Memory Protection-Why not?
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 02:36:34 GMT

In article <BruL1A.ItC@news.cso.uiuc.edu> sjc28473@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven Joseph Chmura) writes:
>While I am sure this has been discussed before, my  curiosity still
>requires me to ask this simple question:  why is it considered virtually
>impossible to add memory protection to AmigaDos?  While implemeting something
>like OS/2  would be incredibly difficult, why not just make a new set of
>processes that would be protected or READ-ONLY? 

I think it's more a case of memory protection not fiting in with C='s
plans.  There aren't enough Amigas with MMUs to make the effort
worthwhile.  C= aren't exactly overstaffed in the OS department either,
so everything would be done according to highest priority.  Something
like localisation (in 2.1) will probably boost sales, and therefore would
be high on a list of things to do.

The actual difficulty of implementing memory protection has been discussed
here and in .programmer MANY times.  Essentially there needs to be an entirely
new set of calls for protected processes and a lot more checking in the OS.
It isn't impossible, just not probable :-(

-- 
Colin Adams       Honours Student - James Cook University of North Queensland
              "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: bill@snoopy (Bill Poitras)
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Reply-To: bill@msi.com
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 20:02:56 GMT

al158305@academ01.mty.itesm.mx (Gustavo Cordova Avila) writes:
: ggg@kepler.unh.edu (Gregory G Greene) writes:
: 
: >	Have you taken a look at IBM's OS/2 2.0 OS?  It does a lot of the 
: >  things you want much better then Windows.  It does require a little more
: >  hardware to run then Windows though. 
: >	
: 
:    Besides being out of the discussion point, if half-OS (OS/2) need 
: a *little* more hardware to run than windows, then it needs much more
: hardware to run (just to run!) than AmigaDOS 2.04. And period. Don't 
: start saying "You haven't seen it run!!" blah blah blah, you CAN'T
: install it in a machine that's less than a 386DX-33 and hope for it to
: run at an acceptable speed, but AmigaDOS can. You can't install it on a
: machine with a 60Mb hard disk and hope to have enough disk space free
: for some apps, and AmigaDOS can.

Ahhh more Amigoid OS/2 bullshit.  Have you seen it run?  From what I've
heard, a 386SX-20 w/8MB RAM runs OS/2 2.0 quite well.  If you just want
the base operating system, DOS but no Windows, no extra applications that
you don't need or system tools you don't understand, OS/2 2.0 would fit
quite nicely on a 60MB Drive.

: End of discussion.

Only because you're afraid of the facts.  Or possibly you don't care
about facts, just speculation.  Yeah that's it. :-0

--
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
| (bill)          | Sunnyvale, CA USA             |                         | 
|                 | FAX (408)732-0831             | bill@msi.com            |
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: tony@ais.org (Tony Poole)
Subject: Re: A message from the National Amiga PC haters Group..
Organization: UMCC
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:33:30 GMT

Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Mike Whalen) writes:

>In a message dated Tue 28 Jul 92  9:04, Dvan@pnet01.cts.com (david Vandeven
>wrote:
> DV> A message from the National Amiga PC haters Group..
> DV> PC's SUCK!
> DV> Any questions?
>  All PCs Suck? PC stands for Personal Computer. IBM PC stands for
>International Business Machines Personal Computer. This means, of course,
>that IBM makes that certain. But if PCs suck.. then I guess ALL PCs suck.
>Ah well.. see you guys.. gonna toss ole Amy out the window.
> DV>     PRIMUS                              
> DV>      SUCKS!         
>  What is this aversion to things that suck? 

Maybe it's not an aversion, maybe it's an attraction?



-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Poole                       tony@umcc.ais.org * tony@irie.ais.org 
Traverse City, MI USA          tony@cherry1.trv.mi.us * tony@cherry1.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: jrm3a@cyclops.micr.Virginia.EDU (Jonathan Moll)
Subject: VM is obsolete Hee Hee Hee!
Originator: jrm3a@cyclops.micr.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 04:10:38 GMT

Why oh Why does VM keep coming up like some holy grail?  Good God, it
was originally a hack to overcome the high cost of primary memory
vs secondary storage.  I take exception to Marc Barrett's statement
of "Hard drive's are cheaper than RAM and will ALWAYS be so".

  Lesse, 4Meg = $130  for RAM so we want say, 20 Meg = $650
  Hmm 50 Meg SCSI drive goes for $350 (average cost).

We are only looking at a factor of 4.5 $/Meg in 1992 Mr. Barrett.
Look at the market since 1975 Hmmm?  Semiconductor densities
have been increasing more rapidly than ElectroMechanical subsystems.
Forget VM guys and gals it's days are numbered (in octal)! 

P.S. Dear TKKC, "VM is obsolete OS technology, Nahh Nahh Phpptt!"
P.P.S.  I do like memory protection (pie in face, panic, machine halts
        with a "memory protection" error) Hee Hee Hee. :)  (Yes kiddies
        I DO KNOW that it doesn't have to halt, just give me an exception
        and call systems in the morning)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  I DID give up on the Amiga!
From: sbiddle@aviate.welly.gen.nz (Steve Biddle)
Date: 29 Jul 92 23:36:38 +1200
 <gromyko.03tg@sputnik.rhein-main.de> <1992Jul28.101352.20956@marlin.jcu.edu.au>
Organization: Steves Amiga - Wellington, New Zealand.
X-Newsreader: Ann 0.9

In article <1992Jul28.101352.20956@marlin.jcu.edu.au>,
	cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams) writes:
>In article <gromyko.03tg@sputnik.rhein-main.de> gromyko@sputnik.rhein-main.de (Michael Grom) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul26.191956.2642@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
>>>Again, it is far better for most people to have a slow non-DMA SCSI included
>>>than to have no HD capability included at all.
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Oh Marc, what a silly answer! What about all those little high-priced
>>Macintoshes Apple sold in the past, without internal harddisks?
>>A computer without a hardddisk/controller gives you the opportunity
>>to choose from what suit your needs best.
>>
>>Leave the silly A600 aside!
>
>I disagree (how unusual everybody says :-) ).
>
>In Australia the A600 is about $650.  It is only around $200
>extra for a 20 MB harddrive.  This will mean a lot more Amiga owners
>will have harddrives, which can only be good for the Amiga.  I doubt
>a 40 MB harddrive would be much more.

Is the A600 actually shipping with a 20meg HD though? Over here in NZ, it's
shipping with a 30 meg SCSI drive. (I kid you not)

>
>The A600 with harddrive is selling for the same price the 500 without
>a harddrive was around a year ago, and the 500 was a huge success in this
>country.  C= is trying to bring harddrives to the low-end, which can
>only be good.

Yup, they're slowly going places. The price of the 2000 has also dropped
over here, and being part of CBM Australia, I can imagine they've also
dropped there as well. A 2000 with 52meg drive and monitor isn't much more
that what a plain 500 with monitor was a year ago..


--
 -------------------------------------------------------------
 Steven Biddle	     -	   Mail: sbiddle@aviate.welly.gen.nz
 Wellington, New Zealand.    OR: BIDDLE_S@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
 -------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling)
Subject: Memory Protection (was Re: Commodore and the Osborne Syndrome)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:15:42 GMT

gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:
>jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
>> Oh please.  Name an OS which has been implemented both with and without
>> memory protection on the same machine.  That would be the only way to make
>> a fair comparison.  [...]
>
>I'll name 2 68000 ones that I've seen with MP.  The first was OS/9,
>the second CD-RTOS.  And guess what...  BOTH slow down to an
>incredible degree when they ran with MP up.

The 68070's MMU (in the CD-RTOS/OS-9 system) eats a clock cycle itself, plus
it has a very limited descriptor set which probably causes much thrashing.
My hat's off to your friend for adding MP and VM to that hardware!  Heck,
even Microware didn't bother supporting the 68070 MMU.  On the other hand:

I ran some benchmarks not long ago on my 16Mhz 68030 box under OS-9, both
with and without MP enabled.  Tick slicing was set to 100/sec, and I was
running more than one instance of the benchmark at the same time (to force
task and MMU switching).  The speed difference for MP was less than 1%.

So a lot of the speed difference depends on the hardware.

best - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Colin Adams)
Subject: Re: C= speaks!!! let's spread the words!!!
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 10:27:28 GMT

In article <haley.712307619@unixg.ubc.ca> haley@unixg.ubc.ca (Ross MacGregor) writes:
>Oh boy, Commodore speaks. Big yawner folks. I guess i was hoping to hear
>something new.  NOT!  INSTEAD we get this drivel blah, blah, "we are such
>great company", blah, "Amiga has a great future" etc.  

Yeah, how can C= expect us to stick up for them?  If they hadn't been
sending the Amiga down the tube so successfully for the last 5 years,
this article would have never been written.  I'm more tempted to write
a letter to C= instead of the article's author, but they would only
toss it in the trash.

>Frankly, there was little there to convince me Commodore is not going
>down the toilet. Sure they've alway's had great plans and then there's
>the roomer's, but look what we have NOW (what the average uninformed
>person see's, it don't look so rosy). 

We will get new toys soon, but it may be a case of too little, too late.

>Ross MacGregor           |  These views are my own and can be considered 

-- 
Colin Adams       Honours Student - James Cook University of North Queensland
              "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett)
Subject: Re: Amiga Future?!?
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:35:53 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.035118.24165@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@libws2.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.020111.8441@news.iastate.edu> barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N Barrett) writes:
>>   Commodore controls the sources to the OS.  Commodore controls the layouts
>>and internal specs for thecustom chips.  Without both of these, no Amiga
>>clones are possible.
>>
>>| Marc Barrett -MB-  |  email: barrett@iastate.edu
>
>	Marc, do you really believe this is why? Are you saying that IBM
>clone companies must have access to OS code and internal chip specs? He
>didn't say that some company should redesign the custom chips and reprogram
>the OS; he merely said they should make Amiga compatibles.
>
>	Such as the Newer Technology portable. Or the Rejuvinator board. Or
>numerous arcade games. The rules are clear; you can make an Amiga compatible
>as long as you don't include CBM's custom chips, which must be bought
>separately. I believe CBM once stated that clones are acceptable if an A500
>is purchased in addition to the clone (for the custom chips).

   Yes, and the Newer Technology portable is $2000 for a mono LCD 'A500'
portable, and the Rejuvinator board is $600 for just the Fatter Agnus and
ECS Denise.  It should be clear even to you that if a company is going to
have any hope of making a viable Amiga clone price competitive with Amigas
made by Commodore, they will have to make the custom chips themselves.  
Otherwise, the clones would end up being 2-3 times the price of exactly the
same machine made by Commodore.  Some clone.

>      //   David Tiberio  SUNY Stony Brook 516-473-5156 AMIGA  DDD-MEN   
>     //  bounce-resistant:    dtiberio%libserv1.ic.sunysb.edu@sunysb.edu
>   \X/	    Perot for President 1-516-399-2259 Long Island, New York

---
| Marc Barrett -MB-  |  email: barrett@iastate.edu
-----------------------------------------------------
From: lindblad@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Jarkko Lindblad)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: I am giving up on the Amiga
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:40:13 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: University of Helsinki

ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO) writes:
: In article <1992Jul24.220958.14001@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> foax@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:
: >Actually the 286 and the 68000 aren't all that similar either.  While
: >the 68000 was concentrating on implementing a 32-bit programmer's
: >model on chip to hide the internal 16-bit arithmetic logic unit and
: >data paths (ask Jarkko Lindblad about this if you doubt me, I got it
: I've asked this question before, and I;ll ask it again:  If the 68000
: as a 16 bit ALU, then why is it that I notice no difference in instruction
: timing between:
: 
: 	add.w		#1,d5
: 
: 		and
: 
: 	add.l		#1,d5
: 
: I have these instructions in a loop and time them over a given period.
: Has anyone else verified this?

I have a sheet in front of me that tells me that:

add.w #1,d5 takes 8 clocks, add.l #1,d5 takes 16. As there is more bus
usage with add.l than add.w on this case, let's compare add.w d0,d1 to
add.l d0,d1, the word-sized addition takes 4 cycles, the long word
sized one takes 8 clocks. Enough proof?
	Perhaps your assembler optimizes add.l into add.w (well, both
are probably optimized into addq.w).

--
Jarkko Lindblad
lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: catapcnl@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Chris Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Revenge of the OS Names (Was: OS Names - what they are...)
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 17:35:04 GMT

Distribution: World

In article <1992Jul21.054028.7409@sbcs.sunysb.edu>  
dtiberio@libws2.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
:In article <1992Jul20.033935.5186@cs.rose-hulman.edu>  
catapcnl@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Chris Lawrence) writes:
:>Distribution: World
:>
:>In article <62438@cup.portal.com> TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko)  
writes:
:>:Did someone mention AmigaDOS in here?
:>
:>I think so... Of course, you know, it really isn't an operating system :-).
:>
:>AmigaDOS  - Disk operating system
:		  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:
:	AmigaDOS is an operating system. Whether you like it or not. 
:
:	Another operating system is the DTBID OS, which is the David Tiberio
:Backing Into a Driveway system, which is frequently overlooked here on the
:nets.
:
:-- 
:      //   David Tiberio  SUNY Stony Brook 516-473-5156 AMIGA  DDD-MEN   

If Commodore would tell us which (OS or DOS) to call it, maybe we wouldn't have  
these stupid arguments.
--
Chris Lawrence
Pretender to the Throne; Destroyer of the Faith
-----------------------------------------------
"Giving money and power to politicians is like giving whiskey and car keys to  
teenage boys."
     - P. J. O'Rourke, "Parliament of Whores"
From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: PeeCees are kludge after kludge after kludge.
Date: 23 Jul 92 12:26:27 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab

In article <1992Jul23.101611.2890@crash.cts.com>, hawk@pnet01.cts.com (John Anderson) writes:
>>>  Woah! It looks like little Danny is getting a bit angry... Danny comes   
>>>into *our* Amiga section thinking he's spouting the gospel, trying to      
>>>exalt the peecee. Look, if you don't like the way things go in *our*       
>>>group (read: *Amiga* advo) then please do leave, otherwise keep your       
>>>hands to yourself, pal. You're in someone else's house, not the other      
>>>way around. Please act accordingly.                                        
>                                                                              
>>OK John, then maybe this'll do.  I'm an Amiga user, so in your view, I'm in 
>>"my" group, right?  OK, so shut the hell up.  You're getting as annoyning as
>>Marc Barrett, and starting to remind me of Thomas Hill (ala ST basher).     
>                                                                              
> Oh! Dan Stephenson's gonna eat this one up!                                  
>                                                                              
> btw, I don't recall asking for your opinion                                  

Nor did anyone ask for yours.  You're an annoying, whining nuisance whose
ignorance and lack of consideration are exceptional, even for an advocacy
group.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of
                          |    many things..."                  Lewis Carroll
pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov   |   Disclaimer:  Opinions?  What opinions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Perot ?
Date: 30 Jul 92 11:41:34 GMT
Organization: FAA Technical Center, Atlantic City NJ

oleg@crumpet.cts.com (Oleg Rovner) writes:

>Bullshit. Both Democrats and Republicans have done a fair share of mud
>slinging, but Democrats are much more notorious for having run quite
>a few poltical machines, which did EVERYTHING to crush any opposition.

  They've done nothing of the magnitude of the Willie Horton piece or
what you're seeing now with the Zealots-for-Life commercials.

>As far as democratic mudslinging, let's take a closer look at the Anita
>Hill testimony, and the involvement of Democratic senatorial aides in it,
>or the Robert Bork hearings, or Judge Ginsburg.

  If Reagan and Bush had followed the previous tradition of submitting a
short list of candidates for the bench then there would be less need to
scrutinize the agenda-laden bozos that have been offered so far.

  -jack-
From: "robert buonincontro" <robert.buonincontro@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: byte review
Date: 31 Jul 92 00:36:57 EST
Reply-To: "robert buonincontro" <robert.buonincontro@canrem.com>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Canada Remote Systems

-> Guys... would it be that "video-ready" Amiga2000HD<whatever> that C=
-> is advertisting now?  well, reviewing that "new" Amiga is obviously
-> not as exciting as hearing about the rumored Amigas.  Nonetheless, it
-> does have an 030 and 100HD... (hey, reviewing it is better than
-> reviewing the A600!)
->
-> What do you folks think?

 I don't think Byte will be reviewing the video ready Amiga. Unless they
are complete fools they already know it is a bundled package. I is also
unlikely that they will be reviewing an Amiga 600. Byte prides
themselves at being the first to report something. The A600 is old news.

 There have been a lot of reports that Commodore will make some official
anouncements concering new products and the direction they are going to.
Since BYTE was the first magazine to actually have and review the Amiga
3000, it is highly possible that they have a new system. With all the
bad talk Commodore has recieved lately from the press and users, it
would be in Commodores advantage to have such a review. Even if the
machine is still in the beta stages it would give people a chance to see
what Commodore has been doing the past little while

    Robert.Buonincontro@Canrem.com
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd)
Subject: Re: C= speaks!!! let's spread the words!!!
Organization: University of Delaware
Distribution: comp
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 11:47:04 GMT

 foax@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:

>supported is quite a strength, too.  How about the SoundBlaster, with
>22 8-bit voices, for $100?  (vs. 8 8-bit voices on the Amiga).  (I'm


     The SB has _one_ eight-bit voice and 11 FM synthesis channels, and can't
do stereo.  The Amiga has four eight-bit voices in stereo.

     Although I'll agree that there's nothing on the Amiga right now to
match today's SVGA graphics _for the price_, there are now a dozen or so
hi-res 24-bit cards available or coming RSN for the Amiga.  And bragging
about a VGA card having a 16-bit interface won't impress too many Amiga users;
we've been complaining for years that our graphics & sound coprocessors
are _only_ 16-bit. :-)



-- 
Don Lloyd                / "...my brain IBM; so if you see me acting strangely,\
don@chopin.udel.edu      \ don't be surprised." - Styx, 'Mr. Roboto'           /
Gibberish is Spoken Here.          Publications Editor, AmigaNetwork 
      MicroSoft Slogan: Resistance is Futile.  You Will Be Assimilated.
From: dridi@choco.UUCP (Gilles Dridi ERF004)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re:  Amigas are cool
Date: 27 Jul 92 23:52:53 GMT
Organization: None

In article <1992Jul27.050959.5697@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO) writes:
>>manipulation), does not have memory protection (which means that one badly
>>written screen blanker could destroy many hours of a user's work), does not
>
>Yes it could.	But let me assure you that you could also loose
>many hours worth of work by shutting off your computer without
>saving your work and much more easily. :) Memory protection is
>much more important in a multi-user system than a single user
>system.

    Right with the first part but not with the second.
    Yet, I remenbered a bug I had with a big script under AmigaVision
    when attempted to save it!

>--
>John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:     hfsi!ata@UUNET.UU.NET
>HFS, Inc.		  VA20	   |	 UUCP:	   uunet.uu.net!hfsi!ata
>7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601    |	Voice:	(703) 827-6810
>McLean, VA  22102		   |	  FAX:	(703) 827-3729

--
Gilles Dridi
{cbmvax!cbmehq}!cbmfra!choco!dridi
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: I DID giev up on the Amiga!
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 25 Jul 92 10:32:14 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <62764@cup.portal.com> TomK@cup.portal.com (Tom R Krotchko) writes:
> IBM *is* getting aggressive again. A look at their price sheet should
> tell you that.  Their prices have tumbled in the past 3 or 4 months
> to about 1/2 of what they were.
>
> I have a feeling they're going to taking back market from a lot of
> the cloners (and if MCA is cheap enough, that would be my choice
> of a PC bus).

Just what do you expect to plug into that MCA bus that will take advantage
of the speed?  Seems like 99.9% of all the cards you can get are ISA...

--
Amiga programmer of: GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle
Sega Genesis programmer of: Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy