Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!udel!rochester!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!troi.cc.rochester.edu!gwni
From: gwni@troi.cc.rochester.edu (G. Wayne Nichols)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: Borland BGI question
Message-ID: <11018@ur-cc.UUCP>
Date: 11 Dec 90 21:07:40 GMT
References: <1990Dec7.121658.25371@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> <wokXT3w163w@infopls.UUCP>, <cbMwB=C00VI8A0oYdi@andrew.cmu.edu> <1990Dec10.201548.4671@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> <334@cti1.UUCP>
Sender: news@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Lines: 19

In <334@cti1.UUCP> mpledger@cti1.UUCP (Mark Pledger) writes:

>A friend of mine who is a professional graphics programmer (and who owns
>an AT&T 6300) explained the problem to me.  Apprently, AT&T does not use
>the standard video mode registration with BIOS properly.  When someone 
>uses the normal BIOS video calls, the AT&T returns an invalid video
>configuration.  The only way out is to specifically check for AT&T type
>machines when developing graphics programs for the PC.  In order to due
>this you will have to contact AT&T's PC technical office (or something like
>that) and find out the exact procedure for detecting the correct video
>modes when using the AT&T 6300.

If this is really the problem, shouldn't it be possible to write a TSR
to intercept the INT 10 BIOS calls and return the "right" data for the
6300's video configuration?  Maybe someone should take a shot at this ...

Perhaps even if the AT&T 6300 video controller were recognized, many
programs do not include support for 640x400 graphics?  If so, then you're
stuck, I'm afraid.  This is one advantage to using Windows ...