🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug17.093809.24122@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE> rommel@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Kai-Uwe Rommel) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.082023.13914@stortek.com> eldenbrg@stortek.com (Dave Eldenburg) writes:
>>
>>So, are you saying there is no way to get this info using an OS/2 2.0
>>call?  Is this IBM's way of telling us that the command line is
>>dead and all new systems should be designed for PM?  There are a lot of
>>applications that don't really need that kind of a user interface.
>>
>>Dave
>
>Yes it looks like this. Remember, if OS/2 is ported to a RISC, it would
>not have a concept like the PC screen buffer, so the VIO/MOU/KBD calls
>are useless.
>
>Part of the work can be done with 32-bit IOCtl calls, for the rest you
>have to call 16-bit API's on PC's.
>
>Kai Uwe Rommel

So, IBM says I should take all my fairly sophisticated command line
applications and convert then to PM.  Now because of the above mentioned
problems (i.e. RISC not having a concept of PC screen buffer or a mouse)
the OS/2 that ends up on another platform does not support PM.  I'm
looking at another major conversion just to get my code to run on the
very same operating system. And the conversion will probably be back
to the command line, at least till IBM get some other user interface
working.  And IBM says this is _better_???

I guess the days of programming for the least common denominator are
gone.  It also sounds like the days of the small time programmer are
numbered too, at least in the IBM environment.  I don't have the
resources to support a major conversion with every hardware platform
change.  And can you imagine the maintenance problems!?!?

Dave