tneff@atpal.UUCP (Tom Neff) (03/26/88)
In article <819@bucket.UUCP> leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) writes: > ... The blind >users are not happy. They've got speech units that let them use a stock PC >and most programs quite easily. They have some trouble, but much of that >can be solved if programmers would follow some simple rules ... > >If the "Mac"/windows/GEM/etc interface wins, they will no longer be able to >use programs without having them specially modified.... I think you (and, by extension, the good folks at Borland Forum) are missing the point of the Windows/OS2 approach. What characterizes the new generation of OS's is not their graphical nature per se, but the use of hardware independent device *drivers* to control all communication with the user. What this means is that all someone has to do is write a DRIVER for your handicapped interface device of choice, and suddenly ALL programs will work with it! The possibilities are endless. The existing tools for handicapped use of a PC are essentially inspired kludges. Future OS's may obviate the kludges, but don't despair... handicapped users will emerge big winners when all is said and done. -- Tom Neff
jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) (03/29/88)
In article <117@atpal.UUCP>, tneff@atpal.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: > the point of the Windows/OS2 approach. What characterizes the new generation > of OS's is not their graphical nature per se, but the use of hardware > independent device *drivers* to control all communication with the user. Ah, yes...the "new" generation. Like OS-9, which has supported dynamic linking and dynamically loadable device drivers on the 6809 since about 1980, and on the 68xxx since about 1984? James Jones [While I *do* work for Microware, my opinions are purely my own.]
rar@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) (03/31/88)
In article <621@mcrware.UUCP> jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) writes: >In article <117@atpal.UUCP>, tneff@atpal.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >> the point of the Windows/OS2 approach. What characterizes the new generation >> of OS's is not their graphical nature per se, but the use of hardware >> independent device *drivers* to control all communication with the user. > >Ah, yes...the "new" generation. Like OS-9, which has supported dynamic linking >and dynamically loadable device drivers on the 6809 since about 1980, and on >the 68xxx since about 1984? And don't forget the OS on the Commodore Amiga, which has had dynamically loadable device drivers since 1985, and other features that are touted to the unknowing world as being "new" on microcomputers (i.e., Multitasking, a large physical address space, message passing, etc.). No flames, please. Just trying to make a point (actually, trying to add to the point made by Mr. Jones). > > James Jones > >[While I *do* work for Microware, my opinions are purely my own.] Rodney Ricks [ "The Opinions of Rodney Ricks", are copyrighted by Rodney Ricks ] [ THEY'RE MINE, MINE, MINE, AND IF ANYONE ELSE CLAIMS THEM, I'LL SUE!!! ] [ However, I will license my opinions for a fee (and royalties) ... :-) ]