> On May 5, 2016, at 1:34 PM, Chuck Guzis <ccl...@sydex.com> wrote:
>
> On 05/04/2016 11:34 PM, William Donzelli wrote:
>
>> Wasn't minicomputer really a marketing term, anyway? Suits and all?
>
> Well, it was the sixties, after all. We all forget "midicomputer". :)
>
> One thing that some may not know about the 1700 is that it had a
> *per-word* protection bit as well as I/O protection on a "per device"
> basis. I don't know of any other computers with that feature.
Burroughs mainframes? While the tag bits aren't quite semantically equivalent
to protection, you get some of the same benefits.
paul
