[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Apple Drops Backward Compatibility for Next MacOS
In article <5536k4$qr6@client2.news.psi.net>,
smentzer@pacbell.net (Steve Mentzer) writes:
> In article <552l5n$cdr@ns1.nl.cis.philips.com>, matzingr@iclab.ce.philips.nl
> says...
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>> the 640K problem is a hardware limitation. The memory map shows
>>these ranges: 0-640K RAM, followed by videoRAM and ROM. If they (IBM)
>>had build it the other way around: starting with ROM from 0, followed
>>by videoRAM and user RAM, they'd never any problems.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Not necessarily. Yes, the 8086 and 8088 had a "segmented" memory architecture
> that limited addressing to 640k. But with the advent of the 286 and higher,
> additional "modes" were implemented allowing linear memory addressing.
I was NOT talking about the microprocessor they used, but about the
way they constructed the motherboard. still MB's today have this
memory-layout:
| 0 -- RAM -- 640 KB | Video | ROM | 1 MB -- RAM -- n MB |
The memory management units used in today MB's can be configured
to compensate for this (anomaly?).
And how DOS tries to extend it's memory beyond 640 KB (or 1 MB)
using "emm386", etc. This wouldn't be necessary when the memory-layout
started with ROM and followed by VideoRAM and RAM.
>
> The only reason DOS still runs on the newer chips is because of its
> "backwards" compatibility. In fact, when you are running dos, you are
> really running a super-fast, cached, 8086.
Quite true.
cu l8r,
--
Edgar.
|\ /| : : Addr: Philips Sound & Vision
/ | \/ | : Edgar R. Matzinger : t.a.v. E.R. Matzinger
/ | | : : building: SFJ-6.58
\ /| /\| : : P.O. Box 80002
\/ / \ : Philips Sound & Vision : 5600 JB Eindhoven
\ /\ / : Advanced Systems & Appl. Labs. : The Netherlands
\/ |\/ : Integrated Circuits Laboratory :Email:
| : : matzingr@iclab.ce.philips.nl
Disclaimer: Any comments, opinions made are mine, etc ...