Mail Archives: opendos/1997/04/18/06:02:34
At 08:20 PM 17/04/97 GMT+0100, Matthias Paul wrote:
>
>On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Mark Habersack wrote:
>
>> > There is also some weird way that DBLSPACE/DRVSPACE have some weird scheme
>> > working as an installable filesystem, I don't really know how stacker does
>> > it (although I assume it's similar)
>> They use some tricks to inject their code into the system (remember the
>> DRVSPACE.BIN file?) and work as a replacement for the FS/DEVICE FAT
>> routines built into the kernel. Stacker probably uses the
>> DRIVER.SYS approach (I'm not sure).
>
>STACKER (at least since 3.10+) also uses the so called pre-load API in
>IBMBIO.COM (before execution of CONFIG.SYS). This has been a major
>law act at that time, when Stac sued Microsoft for using Stac patented
>algorithms in DBLSPACE without licensing them, and Microsoft was
>forced to stop shipping MS-DOS 6.20 (including DBLSPACE) and replace
>it by MS-DOS 6.21 (without DBLSPACE). However, Microsoft had a longer
>breath and sued Stac for de-assembling the undocumented pre-load API
>in MS-DOS 6.20+ (needed to let STACKER install the same way as
>DBLSPACE could). Since Stac suffered from M$ pressure and was almost
>running out of money, they made a deal with M$: Stac was 'allowed'
>to use the pre-load API (as also de-assembled by many other vendors
>without being sued for), and M$ could ship DRVSPACE with MS-DOS
>6.22...
Is it just me, but if MS have hooks in that there applications can use but
other peoples applications can not, then M'Soft are breaking a few laws are
they not? :)
- Raw text -