In article <220620032104338006%jerrykindall[at]nospam.invalid>,
Jerry Kindall <usenet2[at]jerrykindall.com> wrote:
>In article <mcmurtri-DDAC60.20285422062003[at]typhoon.sonic.net>, Kevin
>McMurtrie <mcmurtri[at]sonic.net> wrote:
>
>
>The "64-bit" part refers to register (and data bus) width, not to
>address bus width. (If it did, then the Apple II would have been a
>16-bit machine, but it was an 8-bit machine.) Usually the address bus
>is at least as wide as the data bus, but it is the data bus width that
>determines the "bitness" of a processor.
>
>If each program running on an Apple II could have had its own 64K bank
>of memory, your analogy would hold. And in fact that would have been
>possible with the RamWorks-type cards, except for the minor detail that
>no Apple II OS let you run more than one application at a time anyway

Minor quibble, but GNO/ME on the //gs was multi-tasking. I had
a vt100 terminal hooked into the serial port that I could edit
code in while a gui app was running on the main monitor.

-Jason

--
Jason Perez | "Frodo Lives!" "Gig 'em!"
Austin, TX

In article <bd7ict$odv$1[at]localhost.localdomain>, Jason Perez
<jasonp[at]norton.sps.mot.com> wrote:

> In article <220620032104338006%jerrykindall[at]nospam.invalid>,
> Jerry Kindall <usenet2[at]jerrykindall.com> wrote:
> >In article <mcmurtri-DDAC60.20285422062003[at]typhoon.sonic.net>, Kevin
> >McMurtrie <mcmurtri[at]sonic.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >The "64-bit" part refers to register (and data bus) width, not to
> >address bus width. (If it did, then the Apple II would have been a
> >16-bit machine, but it was an 8-bit machine.) Usually the address bus
> >is at least as wide as the data bus, but it is the data bus width that
> >determines the "bitness" of a processor.
> >
> >If each program running on an Apple II could have had its own 64K bank
> >of memory, your analogy would hold. And in fact that would have been
> >possible with the RamWorks-type cards, except for the minor detail that
> >no Apple II OS let you run more than one application at a time anyway
>
> Minor quibble, but GNO/ME on the //gs was multi-tasking. I had
> a vt100 terminal hooked into the serial port that I could edit
> code in while a gui app was running on the main monitor.

Yes, but that was a different computer than the one we're talking
about. It was a full 16-bit machine with an Apple II emulation mode.

--
Jerry Kindall, Seattle, WA http://www.jerrykindall.com/

If replying to this message by e-mail, send plain text only.
Replies with files or HTML will be deleted by my spam filters.