Mail Archives: opendos/2000/07/17/14:05:20
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 18:12:39 +0100 "Ben A L Jemmett"
<ben DOT jemmett AT ukonline DOT co DOT uk> writes:
> > Even CP/M 86, Kildall's alternative for the original IBM-PC, was
> > released *after* M$'s PC-DOS
> It was written at the same time,
Yes, if you consider QDDOS
and PC-DOS 1.0 to be the
same animal.
> but was in testing for longer ->
> fewer bugs.
No doubt about that -- it
was also extremely expensive,
assuring buggy PC-DOS's
predominance in the
marketplace. Remember, M$
bought QDDOS from Seattle
Microcomputer and did some
adaptation to the specifics
of the IBM-PC hardware, so
PC-DOS was much less of a
porting job than CP/M 86.
> It was just a port of CP/M-80 though, so technically the
> system was around for more than half a decade before MS-DOS.
That's a bit of a stretch
in the context of this
thread, since CP/M wasn't
designed to be portable
between CPU architectures
the porting job was
distinctly non-trivial
compared to what M$ did to
adapt it's purchased DOS
to IBM's requirements.
QDDOS (and therefore PC-DOS
1.0) was essentially a poor
clone of CP/M 2.2 ported
over to the 8086/8088
architecture, CP/M 86 was a
much better clone that was
priced *way* past what the
emerging PC market would
bear. :-)
Thanks for your comments,
Ben.
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
- Raw text -