Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Jul 2009 07:29 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 375537
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: How about memory managers?
by sbergman27 on Tue 28th Jul 2009 01:25
in reply to "How about memory managers?"
I remember in the DOS world, that 16-bit memory managers was an independent market,
But it never should have been. Clearly memory management is an OS function. And it was clear back then. We had real operating systems like Unix and VMS for comparison. (Not to mention my old college CS textbooks.) And we all knew that the lack of mm in DOS was a deficiency.
You really cannot compare that with a web browser, which is clearly an application, not an OS function. At least outside of the fantasies of certain MS execs. And even they seem to have backed off from that fiction in recent times. Last I heard, Gates had even learned the meaning of the word "browser".
Edited 2009-07-28 01:28 UTC




Member since:
2006-07-04
I remember in the DOS world, that 16-bit memory managers was an independent market, a market destroyed by Windows 3.0. Thank God the EC didn't interfere in that. We'd have a ballot for memory managers if the EC of today were in place back then. Same goes for file systems, Explorer/Finder shells, and other things for which there is or have been independent markets yet have now become understood to be standard parts of an OS.