🚀 go-pugleaf

kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley	) writes:
>In article <2056@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>>In article <1990Oct10.001733.1299@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov> kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley	) writes:
>>
>>| Even if it's an SX.  There's nothing a DX can do that an SX can't.
>>
>>  Whoops! The 16 bit data bus prevents doing 32 bit i/o to memory mapped
>>devices, and the addressing space is only 16 MB.
>>
>
>Got any memory mapped devices in mind?  We are talking about Intel 
>architecture here, not Motorola ;-)  Accuse me of "small world" if you
>want, I haven't seen memory mapped i/o for PC's in ten years, that's
>what the i/o bus is for.  As for memory, yeah, you're right, but how
>many people do you know who are using DOS are being limited by the SX's
>16Meg limit?  I don't know anyone, including UNIX and OS/2 users.  How 
>many people are being limited by DOS's 640K limit?  Everyone.  Remember, 
>not everyone has DesqView/QEMM or Windows 386/3.0
>
>Actually, I think I'll let this whole thread go, since I just upgraded
>my 386SX to a 486 (Can you say $1100?)  Defending my SX from ignorance 
>has become a non-issue to me.  Anyone want to buy a slightly used 386SX 
>w/ 0k, plus an AT case and 200W p/s?  It has run DOS, OS/2, ESIX SysV 
>UNIX, DesqView/QEMM, and Windows 386.  Up to 8 Meg on the M/B, AMI BIOS, 
>C&T chipset.

What I have found is the 386SX is a very viable alternative to going to a true
32-bit machine.  Yes, you are going to have the physical memory and 16-bit bus
limitation, but oh well.  It does do the job nicely.
 
     // JCA

 /*
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 ** Flames  : /dev/null                     | Small memory model only for
 ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil     | Unix?  Get the (*bleep*) out
 ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com            | of here!
 ** UUCP    : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 */