Leandro DUTRA wrote:
> 2008/3/23, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> On a 286, protected mode and real mode are incompatible.
> […]
>> It's the reason that Bill Gates was quoted as saying the
>> 286 was a "brain dead" processor.
>
> Bear in mind he was trying to protect his proprietary lock-in, which
> revolved around running real mode applications. Had he stuck to the
> original open-systems plan around Xenix, the 80286 would have been a
> perfectly good processor.
I don't know what you are talking about here. I've been talking about
OS/2 which was developed by IBM and not by Bill Gates to protect "his
proprietary lock-in".
>
>
>> Fortunately, my boss had some serious sessions
>> with Intel early in the 386 development cycle so the 386 was better than
>> it might have been.
>
> Now you got me curious, who was your boss?
>
His name was Dennis Gibbs. He was an IBM hardware development manager
moved to manage a group charged with OS/2 system software and hardware
compatibility testing sometime before I got to the group in 1985. After
the first couple of years of OS/2 development he left IBM and went to
Apple. I have no idea what happened to him after that. He had a
hardware liaison responsibility between IBM and Intel and tried very
hard to influence their design decisions to ease IBM software
development. Sometimes successful, sometimes not.
Chuck Norcutt
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|