home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.pcgeos
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!dtaylor
- From: dtaylor@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Douglas A Taylor)
- Subject: Re: How do you use GEOS? How would you like to use v2?
- Message-ID: <1992Dec23.133429.28665@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
- Sender: news@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
- Nntp-Posting-Host: bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
- Reply-To: doug-taylor+@osu.edu
- Organization: The Ohio State University
- References: <Dec.18.16.20.18.1992.14254@pilot.njin.net> <1992Dec21.135233.29700@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> <1h94o3INNl5v@golem.wcc.govt.nz>
- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 13:34:29 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <1h94o3INNl5v@golem.wcc.govt.nz> harvey_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
- >I for one don't think it should be in the OS.. My idea is that all hardware
- >interfacing of any sort should be handled by drivers, and that
- >includes comms
- >In that way, you could choose from a list of drivers, same as you
- >choose from a
- >list of printers, a list of soundcards, or any other hardware interface. That
- >way *any* comms package would have access to the comm ports, TCP/IP, aome of
- >those fancy multi-port interface boards, and stuff on other types of networks,
- >and any new type of comms that anyone may care to invent in the future....
- >This way you would have a standard 'comms' object, ant the programs wouldnt
- >know or care what they were actualy connected to.
-
- Hmmm... Never thought of putting comm stuff in drivers. Sounds
- interesting. Third parties could write 'em for protocols and hardware
- that the Geofolks don't have time to do.
-
- I agree, though, that there should be a standard "comm" object that
- GeoComm and other terminal programs use on one end and that various
- telecomm equipment can use on the other.
-
- --
- Doug Taylor | Nothing real can be threatened.
- The Ohio State University | Nothing unreal exists.
- doug-taylor+@osu.edu | - A Course in Miracles
-