mithomas@bsu-cs.UUCP (Michael Thomas Niehaus) (12/04/87)
Well, the last version of DOS for the Apple II was DOS 3.3. Currently,
IBM is also at version 3.3. Does this mean that this will be the last
update of MS-DOS, or is this just a coincidence?
WILL MS-DOS DIE AT VERSION 3.3? Stay tuned, same time, same channel...
Michael Niehaus
UUCP: <Backbones>!{uunet,iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomasIsaac_K_Rabinovitch@cup.portal.com (12/06/87)
mithomas@bsu-cs.UUCP (Michael Thomas Niehaus) writes:
->Well, the last version of DOS for the Apple II was DOS 3.3. Currently,
->IBM is also at version 3.3. Does this mean that this will be the last
->update of MS-DOS, or is this just a coincidence?
->
->WILL MS-DOS DIE AT VERSION 3.3? Stay tuned, same time, same channel...
->
->
->Michael Niehaus
->UUCP: <Backbones>!{uunet,iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomas
I seem to recall that Apple DOS 3.3 was succeeded by PRODOS, which is
still in use. Anyway, the main "serious" OS for the Apple was CP/M.
Premature to predict the end of IBM's dominance of desktop computing,
though hopefully they will never regain the stranglehold on the marketplace.
They still have the strongest marketing muscle and always will.
This points out one of the reasons the Apple II (the machine that first
brought us electronic spreadsheets) lost out so quickly to the IBM PC:
simple inability to market and distribute the product. Shortly after
the PC came out, there was a story floating around about a VP of a Fortune
500 company that became enamored of the Apple IIe/Z80 configuaration. He
actually convinced his bosses that this was far more cost effective than
the PC. But the company ended up buying PCs anyway. Why? Because
there was no one source they could buy as many machines as they needed,
since Apple then had no corporate sales office and no one retailer
was capable of filling the order.
Curious to imagine what life might be like today if Apple had got its
marketing act together sooner...
Isaac Rabinovitch
Disclaimer: Just because I think you're wrong, doesn't
mean I don't think you're a fun person!
:-)wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (12/07/87)
I think it was in the latest "PC Week"* there was an article that IBM / Microsoft announced plans for DOS 3.4. Supposedly bigger partitions and files will be possible anlong with other minor fine tunings and bug fixes. Rumors have it that this move (to DOS 3.4) is required due to problems associated with the OS/2 "DOS Compatibility Box" (what a ycuky name). Supposedly MIS directors want to see some more life in DOS to get payback on their "investment" in current DOS based software. Obviously, there is a very large base of XT level hardware that taint gunna run OS/2 and people aren't phsychologically ready yet to chuck those machines. --Bill *perhaps, it was "Infoworld"; they seem so similar.