CCMK@latvax8.lat.oz (Mark Kosten - Computer Centre, La Trobe Uni.) (04/12/90)
In article <54030@microsoft.UUCP>, alistair@microsoft.UUCP (Alistair BANKS) writes: > Further to this, Microsoft, Intel and many other industry leaders, > including the well-known DOS extender companies got together recently to > resolve the problems in current DOS-extender technologies. > > Micrsoft has backed the resulting proposed DPMI standard, (Dos > Protect Mode Interface) and has stated that DPMI applications > will be supported under a future version of Windows and a future > version of OS/2. > > As Gordon Letwin stated, VCPI is technically inedaquate to satisfy > our customer's stated requirements. DPMI enables the same important > features as VCPI, and will be supported in Microsoft's operating systems. > > Alistair Banks > OS/2 Group > Microsoft Sorry for being cynical, but this sounds a bit suspicious. VCPI is a de facto standard now, with top-sellers like QEMM and 386MAX supporting it. Is VCPI so bad? If so, were companies like Quarterdeck (and whoever wrote 386MAX and others) involved in this so-called new standard? Is VCPI a subset of DPMI? Or are we to be saddled with alternative 'standards' just when we thought it was safe to go into extended memory? Replies from 'industry leaders' are very welcome to allay my fears. Mark Kosten, phone: +61 3 479-2767 Computer Centre, ACSnet/UUCP/Bitnet: ccmk@latvax8.lat.oz La Trobe University, X25: 234730008 (ccmk@latrobe.edu.au) Bundoora, Victoria 3083 Australia