Xref: utzoo comp.os.minix:7769 comp.sys.ibm.pc:37347 comp.unix.xenix:8336
Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!noao!arizona!naucse!wew
From: wew@naucse.UUCP (Bill Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: IBM and Apple Operating Systems (Re: dosread.c again)
Message-ID: <1774@naucse.UUCP>
Date: 31 Oct 89 15:38:06 GMT
References: <6724@ficc.uu.net>
Organization: Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ
Lines: 18

From article <6724@ficc.uu.net>, by peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva):
> No, we'd have something based on Concurrent CP/M, OS/9, SOS, or some other
> decent DOS of that period. We'd have something better.
> 
> IBM didn't create the PC indusry. It doesn't do that any more. It looked and
> it saw a thriving industry, and said "I want that". So it took it.
> 
What thriving industry?  At the point that the IBM PC came out there
was little going on in the Home/Desktop PC market.  Yes there were
CP/M based machines that could be purchased for a small fortune, but
I would not call it a thriving industry.  IBM went out on a limb 
and the gamble paid off.

-- 
Let sleeping dragons lie........               | The Bit Chaser
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Wilson             (Bitnet: ucc2wew@nauvm | wilson@nauvax)
Northern AZ Univ  Flagstaff, AZ 86011