Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 07:33:25 -0800 (PST) From: Gene Buckle To: Daniel P Hudson cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: OpenDOS In-Reply-To: <199701281236.HAA40563@freenet3.freenet.ufl.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Might be possible, but he made it sound liek the OS would blow up the > computer if it wasn't MS-DOS, all it does is warn, and truth be known, > DR. DOS was never 100% MS-DOS compatable so the warning was called for. > I never ran across any probelms under windows, but I only use windows, > to this day, for filmanager and Works. > My understanding with DRDOS is that from v6 on there has been 100% compatibility. > > Umm, that was for MS's liscence agreement that IBM had to pay money for > every system sold whether MS-DOS was on it or not. Frankly, I thought > this was dumb, IBM should have known better than to sign such a thing. > Actually, it wasn't IBM, but damn near ever clone maker on the planet. You might want to read the info on Caldera's suit against ms. Has a lot of good info in it. > But let's point out a few point they don't harp about, > 1. AT&T, the makers of this precious Unix OS at one time was ordered > by the FCC to permit useage of thier long-ditance lines, until then > they were essentially a monopoly. Anyone care? No? So why the fuss > over MS? > Nobody cared until MCI was formed and tried to compete against them. When AT&T raised it's boot to crush him, they found out that Mr. McGowan(?) happened to be holding a really long nail, pretty close to vertical. ;) > IBM and Intel have committed several violations, yet they never made the > news, but MS puts a warning message in Windows and the World is > making a mountain out of a mole hill. IBM spent 20 years in the courts in anti-trust battles. (if memory serves, 1960-1981..?) I don't know about Intel... > See the point? A legitimate complaint is one thing, but most of these > people just do it to bitch. Now THAT is a fact. ;) g.