Mail Archives: opendos/1997/02/02/08:08:14
On Sat, 1 Feb 1997, Roger Ivie wrote:
> Iam 'DrDebug' Day wrote:
> >In article <Pine DOT LNX DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 970201093351 DOT 4180A-100000 AT capslock DOT com>,
> >mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca writes
> >>On Fri, 31 Jan 1997, Ian 'DrDebug' Day wrote:
> >>
> >>> One of the first things I will do is Direct screen writes, regardless of
> >>> portability. Who gives a s***, I want it fast on my PC... ;-)
>
> I, for one, give a s***. First, it won't work on the VT52 I have hanging
> off my serial port. Second,
When I use direct writes on my PC, it reads video memory and sends it
down the wire to my remote PC just fine. Sometimes it is a little
gittery but it works great.
> it won't work on embedded systems which use a
> serial console instead of a video board. Why the f*** should I have to design
> video and a keyboard interface into a black box that sits on an airplane and
> logs chatter between the avionics boxes? It's just a pain to have to lug
> around a monitor and a keyboard just because the thing runs DOS.
Hey! Calm down!
#1) Are you saying that you use COMMAND.COM on those little black
boxes on airplanes? I personnally think that this is NOT a good
enough reason for every PC user to NOT get direct video access. I
mean the number of black box users to PC users with a real
keyboard and a real video card and real monitor are about
10000000/1. Sorry.
#2) What we were suggesting was to ADD support for direct screen
writes to existing OpenDOS programs (primarily COMMAND.COM). How
does this effect you? It doesn't. There will no doubt be a
command line switch or a config file to enable direct screen
writes. Judgeing by the number of people interested in OpenDOS,
direct screen writes WILL become a reality.
Judging by your swearing above, it sounds like you are just out to
start a flame war. Sorry, I won't oblige. I'm just stating the facts
as I see them.
> Fundamentally, memory-mapped video sucks. It is not as useful or as flexible
> as a good old serial port. About the only thing it's good for is drawing
> pretty pictures on the screen.
That *ENTIRELY* depends on your applications. I think that serial
based video would really suck in any graphical applications, video
games, GUI's, and countless other graphical applications. Also, I
paid $3000 for this machine, and it had damned well be FAST! If you
want it slow, then type COMMAND.COM /REALLY_SLOW_JUST_FOR_ROGER.
I'll type COMMAND.COM /FAST_FOR_EVERY_PC_USER_BESIDES_ROGER
> > Exactly! Two things have always bugged me:
> >
> > 1) No matter how fast machines get, they always take f***ing ages to
> > boot!
>
> Run CP/M some time. Push the reset button and here comes your A> prompt.
> No f***ing ages to boot.
Yeah, good arguement. Try running ANY program on my entire hard drive
in CP/M. Hey, lets all throw our computers in the garbage, and use
commodore 64's! They come on with a prompt instantly. Hey what a
great idea Roger! Come on, come into this century. Honestly I think
you just replied to start a flame war.
> > 2) No matter how fast machines get, DOS can only manage to do a DIR at
> > 8088 crawl speed.......
>
> By the way, there are (or at least used to be) some really good fast console
> drivers. FANSI Console, for example, is blazing fast and still does ANSI
> terminal emulation.
Who needs an ANSI driver in DOS nowadays? Keyboard redefinition can
be done via 4DOS and many other programs, screen resizing can also be
done via many other programs (I've even written some), color text can
be done via 4DOS, and many other programs. Regardless of which
methods I use, I still don't have any problems sending my programs
down a serial wire so I don't see the argument here. If you care to
see what I mean, feel free to telnet to my computer and run a DOS
session in DOSemu. I'll set up an account for you if you like.
> > Ah, sudden thought (I get those sometimes), perhaps it's a conspiracy by
> > Microsoft to point to the fact that DOS is old and out-dated, and we
> > should be using Windows.... So, come on guys; let's make OpenDOS
> > something to reckon with, then we can close Windows for good.
>
> I would also like to make OpenDOS something to reckon with. It would be
> wonderful to be able to build custom embedded PCs without paying a king's
> ransom to get a BIOS, for example.
Sure, there are many uses for OpenDOS, and many uses for embedded
systems, however I don't see any problems with having the best of both
worlds. Why do you?
Mike A. Harris | http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant | My webpage has moved and my address has changed.
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
RHIDE: Current version 1.10
- Raw text -