Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: 8-bit death (was Re: What the heck IS "Interactive TV"?)
Message-ID: <1991Apr21.195406.25574@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX
References: <e1Gj02be06fI01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> <1991Apr21.152513.23054@sugar.hackercorp.com> <10944@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1991 19:54:06 GMT

In article <10944@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> blissmer@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Corey) writes:
> >MS-DOS is an 8-bit operating system. As is MacOS (a VW Beetle with a great
> >sound system).

> Hmm.  Are you REAL sure about that.  I thought the MacOS was _always_ 16 bit

The 68000 is a 32-bit processor, but the Mac O/S was designed with the same
sort of address space limitations as CP/M. It's even more primitive a design
than the rather nice ProDOS that the Apple-/// used. It's got a glorious
graphics library, but the basic underlying operating system is basically CP/M.

> and will be 32 bit (on 32 bit machines) with 7.0.  It makes little sense to me
> that Apple would write an 8 bit OS for a 16 bit machine (the Mac 128).  It
> does make sense to me that IBM would write an 8 bit OS for an 8 bit machine
> (the IBM XT).

Programming-model-wise, the 80x86 (x<3) is 16-bit, the 680x0 (any x) is 32-bit.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
