On Wed, 9 Jul 2014, Sean Conner wrote:
All I can say is good luck getting all the hardware
to play nicely
together.
OR software.
"Getting adequate performance" was used to justify doing a lot of stuff
that prevented compatability. Some, such as writing directly to video
memory became widely accepted, and [ALMOST] all manufacturers made
allowance for it. But, there were some programs, such as "Flight
Simulator" that wouldn't run on a lot of machines. (Note: by the 1990s,
versions such as the "crash into the twin towers" (where do you think
Osama got the idea??) had solved most of the incompatabilities.
And, some copy-protection schemes were too sensitive.
And, some was deliberate - my publisher (may they Rot In Pieces), in order
to try to make a pitch to IBM, had me create a version of Xeno-Copy that
would fail to run on anything other than the actual IBM machine. But,
then they screwed up and sent THAT out to magazine editors, and it ended
up being used in 1983 (PC? PC-World?) as "the acid test" of compatability.
There were even some idiots who wrote programs on their "Compatible"
machines, who failed to ever test them on a REAL PC!
[1] In the same was as going to the dentist is a
"fun time".
along with, "You might experience some minor
discomfort"?