Int 13h buffer 64k boundaries

On 4/19/2018 6:16 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: While I won't argue the technical merits of your position, I feel like we apply revisionism at times to these things. I would argue that some engineer in IBM ranks was passionately trying to convince IBM brass that IBM needed to have a stake in the personal computer space, lest other companies swallow up the market.? IBM, lumbering giant that it was, probably was reluctant to mess around with toy computers (their opinion no doubt) at all. But, someone (or someones) won the battle, and someone else had the inspirational idea to use off the shelf components, as opposed to having an IBM-branded and designed CPU, etc. Sure, they used old stuff, but it was working stuff, and I think the goal was to get something to market as quickly as possible.? Being overpriced was IBM Marketing's touch (you call it overpriced, as I manufacturer, I call it capitalism at work). Why do I even post this? Someday, the products and software designed and built by the folks in this list will be judged by those who follow us.? Possibly the rest of you have worked in industries where you were allowed to use new solutions, you had ample time to design and develop, and your marketing departments priced your solutions at a reasonable price point, but I've not had those luxuries.? Thus, I want to be fair to those before me who created things like the IBM PC architecture, not because it is a great architecture, but because they shipped a real product that added value for many folks and did so while working inside a company not known for agility.? The folks who did that deserve my respect, and when I am gone and folks look at my design choices, I hope they will respect me for doing what I could given the constraints I faced. Jim