Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!rlgvax!geller From: geller@rlgvax.UUCP (David Geller) Newsgroups: net.micro.pc Subject: Re: INSIDE THE IBM PC Message-ID: <2013@rlgvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 11-Jun-84 19:45:46 EDT Article-I.D.: rlgvax.2013 Posted: Mon Jun 11 19:45:46 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 12-Jun-84 06:59:43 EDT References: duke.4396 <2647@ecsvax.UUCP> <297@intelca.UUCP> Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA Lines: 14 Someone strongly urged programmers not to alter screen memory directly but rather to use the ROM BIOS routines. That's great, sometimes. There are times when, despite however long it takes to recognize and comprehend the information, it is nicer to see things appear on the screen quickly - much faster than how ROM BIOS does it. Graphics have to be done this way. Also - why are you assuming that ROM BIOS is so stable. It seems as if this may not be so. There are good arguments for both schools of thought. I, personally, agree with those that favor methods that are more stable and portable (ROM BIOS). rlgvax!geller David P. Geller