Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • 2
    Linux could not run on 8088 - the minimum was 386. If you are thinking about ELKS, it's not Linux. There were other unices (or similar) capable of running on 8088 (e.g. QNX), but these were very commercial and certainly not aimed at home computer users. Commented Aug 25, 2017 at 12:43
  • @RadovanGarabík you are entirely correct. I'd misremembered that early Linux didn't require 386 and above. I have edited the post. Commented Aug 25, 2017 at 15:04
  • Any decent multitasking OS needs a CPU capable of memory protection. Otherwise fuggedaboutit... Commented Aug 27, 2017 at 21:06
  • 6
    @Harper I pretty much disagree - Even modern real-time multi-tasking systems (RTOS) can very well multi-task without memory protection. Memory protection is just some safety net against misbehaving applications. Commented Aug 27, 2017 at 22:26
  • 2
    The 8088 was not an 8-bit CPU. It could perform 16-bit arithmetic natively, so it should be described as a 16-bit CPU, regardless of the width of the external data bus. Commented Jan 19, 2020 at 5:01