Message-ID: <19970207073112.DD19519@hagbard.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 07:31:12 +0000
From: Dave Pearson <davep AT hagbard DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
To: "'OpenDOS newsgroup'" <opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net>
Subject: Re: [opendos] COMMAND.COM enhancement
References: <19970206144517 DOT QO43890 AT hagbard DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 970206215621 DOT 600B-100000 AT sparkie DOT gnofn DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970206215621.600B-100000@sparkie.gnofn.org>; from Colin W. Glenn on Feb 6, 1997 22:00:39 -0600
Sender: owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Precedence: bulk

Colin W. Glenn writes:
> 
> 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?

Trust me, Ian Day (who first suggested it) doesn't have a slow machine.

-- 
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |     w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.acemake.com/hagbard  |  ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
Also available in the UK:       |       eg - Norton Guide reader for OS/2.
http://www.hagbard.demon.co.uk  |   dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.