segmented memory models

Note: This was written at a eariler date than mailed. This is due to the fact I personally do not have a net connection and read email whenever and however I find a unsecure IEEE 802.11g "Wi-fi" access point. As of such, I ask that would someone please be so kind as to compile all relevant replies to this email into a digest and email that to me, as at the last time I checked my email, I had over thirty thousand unread email messages (30,069 to be exact) from over the last 20 months or more and I am simply too lazy to junk them all -- it's a GMail account and the ratio of incoming daily mail to storage growth is low enough that accumulating email appears to be a non-issue, even with 3 very high volume mailing lists subscribed; wine-dev, cctalk, and I think LKML. (Normally, I sort this all out using a rather ad-hoc set of regexp filters in Thunderbird) My question is rather perplexing. When most people refer to segmented memory, AFAIK, they mean banked memory systems, where each segment is like a piece of paper, that is, seperate from each other. On the contrary, the Intel 8086's segmented memory model is like lessing some source code and using the terminal arrow keys or K/L to move the display one line; given segment X, segment X+1 contains almost all of the memory of segment x, except for a new line of 16 bytes (which the metaphor between a new line in 'less' and the segment differential is rather ironic; most hex editors I have seen display exactly 16 bytes of data per line) The question is, is the Intel 8086's memory model brain-damaged? IMHO, extremely much so.