Author: Georg v. Zimmermann
Date: 07:13:34 01/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2002 at 10:08:22, David Rasmussen wrote: >On January 10, 2002 at 10:05:40, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>> >>>The OS is not responsible for the memory protection, the processor is. So memory >>>is as well protected in Windows 2000 as it is in, say, Linux. >> >>Ahem. >> >>The OS must make use of those features of course. >> >>Putting DOS on an Athlon XP won't give you memory protection. >> > >Oh, of course. That was implied. The OS has to run in protected mode, not real >mode, to take advantage of this. But my point is that any OS that claims to have >any form of memory protection on x86 processors, must use the hardware >protection of the processor. It cannot be made in software. And as such, all >OS'es are equally good. At any rate, my practical experience is that Windows >2000 is as stable as Linux regarding this. > >/David I see. And back to my question. Does this mean it is extremely unlikely that program A makes program B crash by corrupting program Bs memory ? Or do you have to run in a special "protected mode" and how do you turn that on (in WinXP and 2000) ? This is of course assuming that you dont have any hardware trouble or other silly stuff on the PC. Thanks, Georg
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.