| 1 |
Patrick McLean, mused, then expounded: |
| 2 |
> Bob Sanders wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> >> - standard desktop applications, as far as I am concerned, heavily rely on |
| 5 |
> >> OpenOffice.org and that is still 32 bit |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > Desktop apps are fine at 16-bit. Why go to 32-bit? |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> If you can convince OpenOffice to run in 64kb (the maximum amount of memory a |
| 10 |
> 16-bit program is capable of using) of address space, I think Sun or Google |
| 11 |
> would very much like to hire you to do so. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Sometimes I wonder if 32bits is enough for it... |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Having been around awhile, I've used/supported Word Processing systems starting |
| 17 |
with IBM selectric's electonically connected to and overgrown shift register |
| 18 |
and tape storage, to PDP8s and VT278s running DEC's Gold Key packages (12 bits) |
| 19 |
to integrated packages - AtariWorks (16-bits, well, 32-bits internally). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The problem isn't with the number of bits. The problem is trying to emulate |
| 22 |
Microsfot Office which is, sadly, accepted as the pinnacle of office suites. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Bob |
| 25 |
- |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives