Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.caldera.com!park.uvsc.edu!usenet From: Terry Lambert <terry@cs.weber.edu> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.sys.intel Subject: Re: I have one thing to say about Windows '95 & FreeBSD Date: 11 Sep 1995 00:49:40 GMT Organization: Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah Lines: 17 Message-ID: <430134$218@park.uvsc.edu> References: <41gceu$i14@mirv.unsw.edu.au> <41m3at$vn7@lucy.swin.edu.au> <MICHAELV.95Sep7002950@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: hecate.artisoft.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:6035 comp.sys.intel:48283 michaelv@MindBender.HeadCandy.com (Michael L. VanLoon) wrote: ] I would classify Windows 95 as barely "fully protect-mode" as you ] put it. And as a server I wouldnt trusted . Would you trust a unix system ] where any application can write all over the VM space? ] ] You can't write "all over the VM space" in Windows 95. It's memory ] protection may be less than ideal, but your summary is hardly ] accurate. For the pages whom the program would destroy, it first calls map. Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.