Microkernels (WAS RE: New to the list.)

woodelf bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca
Sat Aug 5 15:42:54 CDT 2006


Segin wrote:
> Chuck Guzis wrote:
> 
>> On 8/5/2006 at 1:41 AM Segin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Mac OS 9 is very similar to Windows 3.1 -- no memory protection, 
>>> co-operative multitasking, limited file structures, poor networking, 
>>> one-app's-bug-brings-it-all-down, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> The big difference is that OS 9 is a real operating system.  Win3.1 is
>> basically a DPMI server with a bunch of APIs to implement windowing.  
>> Under
>> the hood, it's still MS-DOS.  One boots OS 9, but not Win 3.1 (or 
>> WIn9x for
>> that matter)--one boots DOS.
> 
> 
> I know this. I was trying to make a comparasion with the first thing 
> that came to mind. If you can think of something better to compare Mac 
> OS 9 to, I'll be glad to hear it.
> 
>> And WIn 3.1 does have memory protection; it's just not very good.
> 
> 
> Not in Standard (286) mode.
> 

Well all I know OS/9 for the 6809 was a REAL OS!
I expect that APPLE just picked the same name for their
OS.





More information about the cctech mailing list