Re: for x-windows, or possibly a DOS-based

Michael Sattler, San Francisco (
Wed, 26 Oct 1994 16:15:46 -0400

At 11:11 10/26/94, Stephen Wight wrote:

>Well, I was actually more interested in the audio portion being made
>available for Windows.

As I recall, the fact that there's no standard Windows sound devices makes
providing audio more daunting. Compare that with the Mac, which comes with
standard audio.

>Yes, dos is archaic, but whoever wrote the
>CU-Seeme app for dos could incorperate bitmap into it.

I think you're pulling my leg. There's no "CU-SeeMe app for DOS", is there?

>You have to
>admit, no matter how much you like windows (which I love), a DOS based
>app would be faster. Just an idea for any DOS dino's out there.

Well, I loathe Windows and DOS (despite the Pentium and 486 on my desk). I
even loathe NT and the new OS/2, but mostly on principle, because I haven't
used them much (since NT decided to eat its file system a few weeks ago :-)
Something about having to worry about interrupts in a modern operating
system rubs me the wrong way. Flame replies to alt.flame, please.

>Please Cornell, Windows needs audio, it isn't fun waving at your friend
>and trying to communicate thru gestures. :)

Hey, wait just a minute there. I've been learning American Sign Language
and it sure is a lot of fun. Besides, doesn't the Windoze version allow
you to type text at the bottom of your screen like the Mac version does?

_/ Michael Sattler <> Don't try to teach _/
_/ FTP Software, West Coast Operations a pig to sing; _/
_/ Quality Assurance Manager it's a waste of time _/
_/ and it annoys the pig. _/