🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <76000290@p.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>I guess if Apple really intended to support virtual memory soon in all
>macintoshes, then it would have put a 68020 or at least a 68010 in the
>Mac SE.  But since most machines (SE's, Plus's) have the 68000, these
>machines will not have virtual memory any time soon.

I have this recurring nightmare. Here I am, having spent a lot of
money on a Mac Plus. (Mac's are *expensive* here in the UK - full shop
price for a Mac Plus is around $2500-3000). The Mac SE was/is just
out-of-reach. I'm looking forward to having the Plus for a number of years,
using it for a variety of tasks at home.  I keep having this horrible
fear of an announcement by Apple:
   "We are committed to memory management on Macintoshes.  The new
System n.0 will run on a 68020-based machine only. In line with our
past upgrade policies, we will sell 68020 boards to SE owners for
$not-much. We consider the 68000-based Mac to be obselete. The minimal
Macintosh is a 68020-based one. The Mac Plus is a bad dream. We will
not support it. Future software will not run on it."
   Mummy, mummy, make the bad dream go away.... :-)

[disclaimer: I'm not suggesting for a moment that anything like this is in
 the works. It's just a fear I have.]

>Don Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois

		Nick.
--
Nick Rothwell,	Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh.
		nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk    <Atlantic Ocean>!mcvax!ukc!lfcs!nick
~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~
...while the builders of the cages sleep with bullets, bars and stone,
they do not see your road to freedom that you build with flesh and bone.