Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 22:00:39 -0600 (CST)
From: "Colin W. Glenn" <cwg01 AT gnofn DOT org>
To: "'OpenDOS newsgroup'" <opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net>
Subject: Re: [opendos] COMMAND.COM enhancement
In-Reply-To: <19970206144517.QO43890@hagbard.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970206215621.600B-100000@sparkie.gnofn.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 6 Feb 1997, Dave Pearson wrote:

> Roger Ivie writes:
> > modifying COMMAND.COM so that it does direct screen writes down to a
> 
> What I fail to understand is why so many people seem to totally ignore
> one important aspect of what was proposed. IT'S AN OPTION!!! That is,

You know, it's just occurred to me, I'll almost bet that those squeaking
about being able to have command.com direct write have slow machines?

A 486SX66 would only spend about 0.01 percent of the time running through
the DOS/BIOS interface, and most of the time waiting on you.  What's the
rush? A 386SX33 might be 10x that, even so, it's minimal overhead. 

(P.S. Wild Hairy Guesses!)