Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!betsey
From: betsey@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth Fike)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: MS-DOS 3.3 or 4.01?
Message-ID: <1990Nov19.222624.6537@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 19 Nov 90 22:26:24 GMT
References: <1990Nov19.032141.23893@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <997@demott.COM>
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 25

In article <997@demott.COM> kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) writes:
>In article <1990Nov19.032141.23893@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> betsey@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth Fike) writes:
>>CompaqDOS is, in general, nicer than MS-DOS...in my opinion.
>>However, I do not like Microsoft in general, so keep that in
>>mind.  
>
>    Microsoft writes Compaq DOS, under contract.  It's identical to normal
>DOS, except for the changes Compaq requests.
>
>
>-- 
> _
>Kevin D. Quitt         demott!kdq   kdq@demott.com
>DeMott Electronics Co. 14707 Keswick St.   Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266
>VOICE (818) 988-4975   FAX (818) 997-1190  MODEM (818) 997-4496 PEP last
>
>                96.37% of all statistics are made up.

Yes, but the Compaq version is still superior.  AND it "lacks"
some bugs found in good ol' MS-DOS.  So I stand by what I
said...there are REASONS for the changes Compaq requests.

			Betsey ---<---<-@
                            
			     G(TB)^2