e-smith@utah-cs.UUCP (Eric L. Smith) (12/15/85)
In article <12200023@orstcs.UUCP> richardt@orstcs.UUCP (richardt) writes: > >1) IBM wanted CP/M-86. When Microsoft informed them that DRI was respnsible >for CP/M, IBM went and talked to DRI. DRI refused to give them exclusive >rights to name and marketing, along the lines which PC-DOS now has. IBM >went back to MicroSoft and said "Write us an OS that can use CP/M calls and >looks like CP/M-86." Voila, MS-DOS is born. Note that the CP/M "Call 5" >convention is *still* supported in MS/PC-DOS. > Sorry, but Microsoft bought this thing called "86-DOS" from Seattle Computer and turned it into MS/PC-DOS 1.0. When I worked at Apparat in Denver, we had a Seattle Computer system running more than a year before the IBM PC was introduced, and all of our software moved directly to the PC without modification. This is how we got an assembler before the IBM Macro Assembler became available. The interupts and system calls were identical. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eric L. Smith (801) 581-8100 e-smith@utah-cs.arpa ...decvax!utah-cs!e-smith 3118 Merrill Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112 The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of the University of Utah, my friends, enemies, computer, or even me. :-) Is this the most magnificant fire you have seen or am I crazy?
richardt@orstcs.UUCP (richardt) (12/21/85)
Yah. My mistake. I remember reading a description of the evolution of
the Seattle Computer dos ("good 'ole" V1.1) in a byte several years ago,
now that you mention it.
{hp-pcd | tektronix} !orstcs!richardt
Richard Threadgill
1230 NW 23rd #7
Corvallis Or