paryavi@harris.cis.ksu.edu (Saiid Paryavi) (10/30/90)
I was just looking over the spec sheet on the Apple IIe Card for the LC. On
the back under the heading Compatible operating systems it lists:
* ProDOS
* DOS 3.3 <------
* Pascal
Does this mean that it is compatible with MS DOS 3.3??? Or am I missing
something here?
--
Saiid Paryavi CIS Department
Internet: paryavi@harris.cis.ksu.edu Nichols Hall, KSU
UUCP: {rutgers, texbell}!ksuvax1!harry!paryavi Manhattan, KS 66506vinnie@pawl.rpi.edu (Matthew V Whalen) (10/30/90)
Saiid Paryavi writes: >I was just looking over the spec sheet on the Apple IIe Card for the LC. On >the back under the heading Compatible operating systems it lists: > > * ProDOS > * DOS 3.3 <------ > * Pascal > >Does this mean that it is compatible with MS DOS 3.3??? Or am I missing >something here? No..not at all. The DOS 3.3 Apple is refering to is THEIR DOS 3.3. This is the operating system that ProDOS replaced. It has absolutely nothing to do with IBM at all. matthew whalen vinnie@pawl.rpi.edu
twl@cs.brown.edu (Ted "Theodore" W. Leung) (10/30/90)
>>>>> On 30 Oct 90 01:57:49 GMT, paryavi@harris.cis.ksu.edu (Saiid Paryavi) said: > * DOS 3.3 <------ > Does this mean that it is compatible with MS DOS 3.3??? Or am I missing > something here? Yup, you are. I'll date myself a little here.... This is the venerable Apple II DOS 3.3, the operating system that ran on Apple II's before ProDOS. 3D0G! Ted -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet/CSnet: twl@cs.brown.edu | Ted "Theodore" Leung BITNET: twl@BROWNCS.BITNET | Box 1910, Brown University UUCP: uunet!brunix!twl | Providence, RI 02912
fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) (10/31/90)
In article <1990Oct30.015749.6014@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu>, paryavi@harris.cis.ksu.edu (Saiid Paryavi) writes: > I was just looking over the spec sheet on the Apple IIe Card for the LC. On > the back under the heading Compatible operating systems it lists: > > * ProDOS > * DOS 3.3 <------ > * Pascal > > Does this mean that it is compatible with MS DOS 3.3??? Or am I missing > something here? Probably. Before there was an MSDOS, there was DOS 3.2 for the Apple][. DOS 3.2 --> DOS 3.3 --> (DOS 4.0) --> (XDOS) --> ProDOS. with the ones in parentheses development version that eventually led to a commercial product. -- ------------ The only drawback with morning is that it comes at such an inconvenient time of day. ------------
macman@wpi.WPI.EDU (Chris Silverberg) (10/31/90)
>I was just looking over the spec sheet on the Apple IIe Card for the LC. On >the back under the heading Compatible operating systems it lists: > > * ProDOS > * DOS 3.3 <------ > * Pascal > >Does this mean that it is compatible with MS DOS 3.3??? Or am I missing >something here? DOS 3.3 is referring to Apple DOS 3.3, the forever popular predecessor to ProDOS. - Chris =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Chris Silverberg INTERNET: macman@wpi.wpi.edu Worcester Polytechnic Institute Main Street USA 508-832-7725 (sysop) America Online: Silverberg WMUG BBS 508-832-5844 (sysop) "Ask me about TeleFinder... A Macintosh BBS with a Macintosh interface"
jtc@latcs1.oz.au (John Catsoulis) (10/31/90)
In article <1990Oct30.015749.6014@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu> paryavi@harris.cis.ksu.edu (Saiid Paryavi) writes: >I was just looking over the spec sheet on the Apple IIe Card for the LC. On >the back under the heading Compatible operating systems it lists: > * DOS 3.3 <------ >Does this mean that it is compatible with MS DOS 3.3??? Or am I missing >something here? History lesson: No it isn't MS-DOS 3.3. The old Apple ][ operating system was called DOS long before the PC reared its Intel head. DOS just means "disk operating system" and not specifically Microsoft's product. John. jtc@ee.latrobe.edu.au
KPURCELL@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK (11/05/90)
In article <1990Oct30.015749.6014@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu>, paryavi@harris.cis.ksu.edu (Saiid Paryavi) says: > >I was just looking over the spec sheet on the Apple IIe Card for the LC. On >the back under the heading Compatible operating systems it lists: > > * ProDOS > * DOS 3.3 <------ > * Pascal > >Does this mean that it is compatible with MS DOS 3.3??? Or am I missing >something here? > >-- >Saiid Paryavi CIS Department >Internet: paryavi@harris.cis.ksu.edu Nichols Hall, KSU >UUCP: {rutgers, texbell}!ksuvax1!harry!paryavi Manhattan, KS 66506 Oh yea of very short memory (and young age?). When I was a kid .... in the long lost days when Steve Jobs was almost a boy, and hacker wasn't a four letter word, I used to sell Apple II's to people and they like them ('twas only a Saturday job, mind you). And the software of choice was VisiCalc runnin under DOS 3.3 for it was better than DOS 3.2. And then the evil beige darkness fell across the land in '81. An lo, people did forget that PC means personal computer and not a pile of shit built by IBM. An so the term DOS was corrupted (though IBM had invoked that name before -- Disasterously OverSized) Whats that nurse? Oh, it breakfast time. I have to go. Send donations to "The Alan Turing Home for the Recursivley Bemused", these old hackers need all the help they can get. Can anybody spare a Twinkie? A Jolt? Kevin Purcell | kpurcell@liverpool.ac.uk Surface Science, | Liverpool University | Programming the Macintosh is easy if you understand Liverpool L69 3BX | how the Mac works and hard if you don't. -- Dan Allen