5 May
2016
5 May
'16
1:46 a.m.
On Thu, 5 May 2016, Dave Wade wrote:
I thought we were talking Mini Computers. The
Ferranti/Manchester Atlas had
virtual memory of a sort which provided protection, and indeed IBM bought
the Virtual Memory patents from Manchester University. I gather the PDP/11
received Memory Mapping boards early in its life, didn't these offer some
protection?
Yes, originally I had Minis in mind, and yes - this term is not well
defined. Anyhow I learned a lot from all the answers as many differnet
machines have been covered in contrast to the normally DEC biased
traffic here. What still is a quite interesting question for me is,
that purely "mapped memory" or "virtual memory" does not match the
answerr to my question as it still lacks the IO aspect and I'd call
it only memory protection if there is a method to prevent ordinary
programs from modifying the memory map.
So from my point of view the HP2100 matches the criteria of my initial
question, the Rolm APM does but probabaly some others mentioned for their
virtual memory do not. E.g. the DG mapped memory (Nova3 or Eclipse)
lacks the "user prohibited to modify map" feature I think.
And for sure: Atlas was a very interesting machine with great capa-
bilities for its days!
Erik.
-----Original
Message-----
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Curious
Marc
Sent: 05 May 2016 01:07
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
<cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: AW: When did Memory- and IO
Protection Emerge (Esp. in
Minis)?
In the not mini but very maxi category, I just learned that IBM
implemented
memory protection as an RPQ (customer feature) at
the request of the MIT
folks that built the first IBM time sharing system (CTSS, the predecessor
of
Multics), on their IBM 7094. Around 1963, unless
it was already
implemented
in the IBM 7090 which would have been 1961. At
least that's my cursory
understanding of it from www.multicians.org/thvv/7094.html . I was very
surprised it was that early!
Marc
Sent from my iPad
> On May 4, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
>
> Is the CDC 1700 considered to be in the family of "minicomputers"?
> (i.e. was the word invented before then?).
>
> If so, the 1700 had a rather elaborate system of memory and peripheral
> protection. Circa 1965 (at least that's the date on my manual).
>
> --Chuck
>