Text File

Aucbvax.5683 fa.works utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!works Sun Jan 3 23:15:58 1982 WorkS Digest V2 #1 >From JSol@RUTGERS Sun Jan 3 23:13:27 1982 Works Digest Monday, 4 Jan 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 1

Today's Topics: Administrivia - Volume 2 Hunting For NEC Graphics S100 Board Large Address Spaces - Multics 68000-Based APPLE Query SUN Workstation ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 Jan 1982 2319-EST From: The Moderator <JSOL AT RUTGERS> Subject: Administrivia

Well, I'm back from my vacation and am resuming WorkS today as promised. Note that we are now officially starting Volume 2. I plan to increment the volume number each year on Jan 1st.

An additional note, In the next week or so, I will be moving my base of operations to the USC-ECL machine, and WorkS will also move there. At this point, there is no address for WorkS at USC-ECL, so continue to use either the Rutgers address or the MIT-AI address. I will keep you posted on developments as they occur. I hope the transition will be a smooth one...

Cheers, JSol

------------------------------

Date: 24 Dec 1981 06:37:44-PST From: allegra!rdg at Berkeley Subject: Hunting for NEC graphics S100 board

We are hunting for an S100 graphics board built around the NEC graphics display controller (the PD7220). Has anyone built one? Any commercially available boards? please respond to allegra!rdg. thanks, -ron gordon (201) 582-4099.

------------------------------

Date: 25 December 1981 16:34-EST From: Leonard N. Foner <FONER AT MIT-AI> Subject: Large address spaces

I'm certainly no expert on Multics, since I've never really used it, but isn't the Multics system designed to really \use/ a large address space? I vaguely recall \somebody/ discussing (on this list?) the fact that Multics looks at everything as if it's in memory, and that "files" are a convenience to the user more than anything else.

What's the real story here? Any such systems around, which really make use of a large address space in virtual memory? Any workstations around which do this? Is there good reason for a workstation in particular to be \able/ to do this or to be engineered to take advantage of using a very large virtual address space in a really aggressive way? Or will "good old software" for workstations be okay? Does it matter for workstations if they really \are/ 20-30 years behind the times, as someone has suggested most systems are... is it that much of a pain in the neck to those who design them?

<LNF>

------------------------------

Date: Sunday, 27 Dec 1981 15:31-PST From: mike at RAND-UNIX Subject: 68000-based APPLE

Does anyone have any information about the new APPLE system, supposedly 68000-based? Will it be cheap or expensive? Will it have a bitmap? Will it truly run Smalltalk? When will it be released? Etc.

Rumors are welcome.

Michael Wahrman

------------------------------

Date: 1 January 1982 19:16-EST From: Andrew S. Cromarty <CROM AT MIT-AI> Subject: SUN Workstation

On about 13-July there was an entry in this digest from Andy Bechtolsheim (AVB at SU-AI) describing the Stanford University Network workstation: 68000-based w/ 1Kx800 BitBlt display, mouse, Multibus, Ethernet interface. I later requested more info from him on the SUN, but my request went unanswered.

Particularly in light of the discussion in this digest regarding 68000 paging problems, it would be interesting to know what approach they have taken in designing the SUN. I assume it's not the same "solution" that Apollo used (twin 68000's), since the 13-July synopsis simply described the processor as "8 MHz 68000, executing without wait states". It does, however, offer both segmentation and paging ("two-level, multi-process, segment-page memory map"), so the problem is there to be solved. Does anyone know how they handle it? asc

------------------------------

End of WorkS Digest ******************* -------

----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/

This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:

1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.

2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:

The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.