RE: Prisoner of cyberspace

Joe Barrera (joebar@MICROSOFT.com)
Tue, 12 May 1998 17:10:37 -0700


> From: Joachim Feise [mailto:jfeise@ics.uci.edu]
>> [ Lloyd Wood ]
>> Xenix would run on a 286? How was VM implemented?
>
> Hey, it's a long time ago.

The 286 had segmentation. You don't need paging to implement VM. And you
don't need paging to call it Unix (or Xenix or whatever). In fact, UCB broke
the Unix tradition by combining Unix with paging. (System V stuck with
swapping for quite a while longer.)

> But I remember that Xenix ran on 286. And just yesterday I was listening
to a
> SCO presentation, and the presenter mentioned that as well. He also said
that
> there was a Xenix implementation that ran on 8086!

Yes, there was.

> MS should be happy about that, they still get $15 on every copy of
commercial
> Unix on x86 (except from Sun and SGI).

No longer, according to SCO:

MICROSOFT RELEASES SCO FROM OBLIGATION TO INCLUDE, AND PAY ROYALTIES ON,
OUTDATED UNIX CODE
http://www.sco.com/press/release/6698.html

- Joe

Joseph S. Barrera III <joebar@acm.org>
<http://research.microsoft.com/~joebar/>
Phone, Office: (415) 778-8227; Cellular: (415) 601-3719; Home: (650)
588-4801
Microsoft Research (BARC), 301 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-6605
The opinions expressed in this message are my own personal views and do not
reflect the official views of Microsoft Corporation.