Xref: utzoo comp.os.minix:7671 comp.sys.ibm.pc:36903 comp.unix.xenix:8210
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!b.gp.cs.cmu.edu!Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
From: Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: IBM and Apple Operating Systems (Re: dosread.c again)
Message-ID: <254532d1@ralf>
Date: 25 Oct 89 04:13:05 GMT
Sender: ralf@b.gp.cs.cmu.edu
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science
Lines: 18
In-Reply-To: <6661@ficc.uu.net>

In article <6661@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) wrote:
 >The original system was a poor copy of CP/M, chosen only because it
 >was cheap and IBM was pissed at Digital Research (thanks to some stupidity
 >on the part of Gary Kildall).

What few people seem to remember is that IBM originally offered a choice
of THREE operating systems: MSDOS, CPM-86, and UCSD p-System.  Of these,
MSDOS was not only the cheapest, but also quite compatible with CPM-80,
allowing mechanical translation of 8080 programs (in fact, MSDOS still
supports the CP/M entry point and calling convention).
--
UUCP: {ucbvax,harvard}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf -=-=-=-=- Voice: (412) 268-3053 (school)
ARPA: ralf@cs.cmu.edu  BIT: ralf%cs.cmu.edu@CMUCCVMA  FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/46
FAX: available on request                      Disclaimer? I claimed something?
"How to Prove It" by Dana Angluin
  6.  proof by omission:
      "The reader may easily supply the details."
      "The other 253 cases are analogous."