Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #154799

Re: Computer Products United

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, 4 Dec 2015, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2015-12-04, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>
>> The BIOS was in charge of dealing with interface, so what else in the OS
>> needed "fixing" to deal with different hardware?  I gather there might
>> have been some 8088 computers that didn't have a BIOS in ROM, so perhaps
>> it wsa loaded from disk, and that might require a different arrangement.
>> But at the time, hardware wsa handled through the BIOS, so what mods would
>> be needed?
>
> Yes, hardware was handled through the BIOS, but not nearly well enough.
> Even serial ports couldn't be driven at reasonable speed through the
> BIOS - at least not without chewing up any CPU cycles that the application
> might need.  Graphics was even worse, with new generations of hardware
> coming out in rapid succession.  Programmers had no choice but to go to
> the metal - and there went any hope of portability.
>
Which is what "broke" the "IBM PC compatible" that wasn't compatible 
enough.

But initially the expectation was that the BIOS would handle I/O, so it 
didn't matter if the hardware didn't follow the "IBM PC".

I was just questioning the notion of a "custom MS-DOS".  I know there was 
a period when tha seemed to be happening, but was it actually customized, 
or was that about marketing, either from Microsoft or the computer 
company?

   Michael

Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Computer Products United chriskeegan2014@gmail.com - 2015-11-15 20:54 -0800
  Re: Computer Products United Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-16 05:28 +0000
    Re: Computer Products United Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-16 09:59 +0000
      Re: Computer Products United Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-16 11:40 +0000
    Re: Computer Products United Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-16 11:35 -0500
      Re: Computer Products United Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-16 11:23 -0600
        Re: Computer Products United scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-16 17:27 +0000
        Re: Computer Products United Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-16 18:27 +0000
        Re: Computer Products United cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2015-11-16 21:48 +0000
        Re: Computer Products United Freddy1 <something@something.com> - 2015-11-16 17:38 -0500
        Re: Computer Products United Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2015-11-18 19:52 +0200
        Re: Computer Products United Jan van den Broek <fortytwo@xs4all.nl> - 2015-12-07 21:26 +0100
      Re: Computer Products United Daiyu Hurst <daiyu.hurst@gmail.com> - 2015-11-27 12:29 -0800
        Re: Computer Products United chriskeegan2014@gmail.com - 2015-12-02 11:31 -0800
          Re: Computer Products United chriskeegan2014@gmail.com - 2015-12-02 11:34 -0800
            Re: Computer Products United Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-04 00:00 -0500
              Re: Computer Products United Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-04 20:56 +0000
                Re: Computer Products United Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-04 17:12 -0500
          Re: Computer Products United Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-02 18:44 -0500
          Re: Computer Products United Daiyu Hurst <daiyu.hurst@gmail.com> - 2015-12-05 17:29 -0800
            Re: Computer Products United Daiyu Hurst <daiyu.hurst@gmail.com> - 2015-12-05 17:29 -0800
            Re: Computer Products United "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 08:27 -0500
  Re: Computer Products United "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-16 17:02 +1100
  Re: Computer Products United Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-16 11:36 -0500
  Re: Computer Products United Daiyu Hurst <daiyu.hurst@gmail.com> - 2015-11-27 12:28 -0800

csiph-web