To: pierre AT tycho DOT com
Cc: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: OpenDOS graphics drivers
Message-ID: <19970514.172136.8039.3.chambersb@juno.com>
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 970514130343 DOT 17340A-100000 AT 55-174 DOT hy DOT cgocable DOT ca>
From: chambersb AT juno DOT com (Benjamin D Chambers)
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 20:24:28 EDT
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 14 May 1997 14:04:12 -0400 (EDT) Pierre Phaneuf
<pp AT 55-174 DOT hy DOT cgocable DOT ca> writes:
>On Wed, 14 May 1997, Leath Muller wrote:
>
>32 bit isn't double the speed of a 16 bit program! The *main* 
>advantage
>that you can access larger areas of memory at once. For example, you 
>can
>use a linear frame buffer, instead of using 4 segments and bank 
>switching
>to access the video card. This is a *bit* faster since you don't have 

A "bit"?  Hell yeah!
(_Especially_ considering most cards with LFB's run faster using those
than a0000)

>to
>bank switch, not because of using 32-bit instructions. Of course, 
>using
>32-bit instruction will help a bit too. Under NT, an ordinary user 
>cannot
>set a priority to real-time BTW.

Of course, there's also BUS width to consider - an RM program can still
use the 32bit string instructions, so you end up with a wierd hybrid of
16bit memory and 32bit op's, so the whole discussion is rather pointless.
I'd like to ask:  What parts of the program are 32bit?

>The only two advantages of DirectX is that it gives any program access 
>to
>all the features of hardware acceleration (which is interesting) and
>overcome the GDI, which is a GUI-only concern, since there's no GDI to
>overcome in DOS. 

I'd like to see a 'Windows Extender':
We can sell it as a speed improver for Windows apps, it'll give direct
access to everything!  (Basically just wipes system memory and hands the
CPU over to the program :)
Of course, programs won't directly benefit from it until they're coded
for it, but that's the same as MMX, right?
(Anybody else frequent x86.org?  Check out the article about Photoshop
MMX)

...Chambers