Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 10th Dec 2008 22:52 UTC, submitted by teigetje
RISC OS And it seems as if another minor, barely-alive operating system will become encumbered by legal bickering between two small companies. The RISC OS scene, which is already a tangled and complicated mess of companies, version number teasing and incompatible versions, might be torn apart even further because RISCOS Ltd might take legal action trying to prevent RISC OS Open Ltd from releasing a RiscPC compatible ROM from the RISC OS 5 shared source project. Should you feel confused, you needn't worry: so does everyone else.
Thread beginning with comment 339961
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Futility
by memson on Thu 11th Dec 2008 13:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Futility"
Member since:

Memory addressing!! That's it!! I knew it was something silly like that.

Mind you, the Acrchies were always billed (to us students who used them by our teachers/professors) as being "32bit", as I guess the actual processor ran in a 32bit mode.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Futility
by Earl Colby pottinger on Thu 11th Dec 2008 14:49 in reply to "RE[2]: Futility"
Earl Colby pottinger Member since:

Remember 26 bits = 64 million addresses. At that time Amiga was limited to 16 million, Atari for some odd hardware reason to even less. Mac were still at 16 million if I remember right.

And Intel machines were using all sorts of incompatible addressing scheme to break 1 million bytes.

Acorn and ARM users must have thought they had it made in the shade.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Futility
by Stoppers on Fri 12th Dec 2008 09:47 in reply to "RE[3]: Futility"
Stoppers Member since:

The 26-bit addressing limitation was only on code; data could be anywhere in a 32-bit address space (4GB), hardware permitting.

So, you'd have to "limit" your code (per process) to the lowest 64MB in memory. That's still quite a lot of code.

Reply Parent Score: 1