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