From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: schily@schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 21:59:29 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] 68000 vs. 8086 ( was Algol68 vs. C at Bell Labs) In-Reply-To: References: <20160630134457.BE26B18C103@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <6bec9228a3749e424f479675e12b0e71.squirrel@webmail.yaccman.com> Message-ID: <57757a21.LPn+mSLKqXszpxKR%schily@schily.net> Dan Cross wrote: > Still, the point that the 68451 MMU was pretty lame is well taken. The > segment table was too small (96 entries?) and it was clearly designed to > support segmented memory rather than paging. It is inadequate to the latter > task. The 68851 available for the 68020 got it right; supposedly this could > be used with the 68010 as well, but I don't know that anyone ever tried > that in a real product. We at H.Berthold AG in Berlin did manage to use 12 68451 in parallel for our virtual UNOS variant. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'