Re: Is this true?

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Richard Harvey wrote:

>the only reason DOS apps still work is that Intel is totally chained to an
>instruction set dating back to the 8086. Fairly easy to remain compatible
>when you run on 70's technology.

More precisely, when you continue to support a 70s instruction set
even though almost all new software no longer uses it.

> Why aren't you asking why you are losing
>upwards of 50% or more in performance when Windows or your chip has to
>switch back into 16-bit compatibility mode to run some device driver or
>codec? That's the price you are paying for that wonderful DOS compatibility.

Actually, Windows drivers are 32-bit, and the 16-bit interface is provided
by a wrapper for the DOS window.  There is little if any 16-bit code in a
running (note, I didn't say _booting_) Windows system.

>And all of that gets flushed down the drain when Itanium arrives -- all your
>compatibility down the drain, as Intel will have to rely on Microsoft to
>provide software emulation, via Apple/Macintosh, to preserve any level of
>backward compatibility. It's the only way they can move their chipset
>forward after staking it to the ground for so long!

As British computer scientist Brian Randell said in the 60's:
"A philosophy of evolution not revolution is actually a philosophy
of fewer, but bloodier, revolutions."

-michael

Check out 8-bit Apple sound that will amaze you on my
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/