On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:10:59 -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) <shmuel+ibm- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/22/2006 > at 10:16 AM, Charles Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >>Was it Gene Amdahl who said the biggest mistake of the 360 >>architecture was the 24-bit addresses? > snip! > >I wouldn't call that the biggest mistake, however. When the S/360 came >out virtually all of the major players had some sort of hardware >address relocation, whether block relocation, paging or segmentation. >Even IBM had paging in the laboratory. The use of absolute addresses >shocked me more than the address size. > Amdahl didn't believe in virtual memory. It seems like he would have anticipated the need for it, with the 360/67 already out, but the original design for the 470/6 (IIRC) had to be stopped while they added virtual memory support and changed the name to 470V/6. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
