Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: 8-bit death Message-ID: <1991Apr28.122439.13393@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 28 Apr 91 12:24:39 GMT References: <2584.tnews@templar.actrix.gen.nz> <1991Apr26.085327.1@vf.jsc.nasa.gov> <1991Apr27.155155.12730@marlin.jcu.edu.au> Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX Lines: 22 In article <1991Apr27.155155.12730@marlin.jcu.edu.au> cpmwc@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Matthew W Crowd) writes: > This is wrong, MS-DOS is a 16bit operating system, 386's are the ones > who don't benefit while running MS-DOS. Nope, MS-DOS is a straight copy of CP/M-80. Originally named QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) by its author's at Seattle Computer (they were well aware that it was a kludge, only useful until they could afford to do it over from scratch), it was just plain adopted by Microsoft after IBM asked them to do an O/S for the IBM-PC. You see, IBM bought the PC from Seattle. Microsoft was purely a language house at the time, with absolutely no experience in operating systems. They really had no alternative. What I never could understand was why IBM went to Microsoft at all, when there were other, better, companies out there. DRI blew them off, we know that, but DRI wasn't the only fish in the sea. In any case, MS-DOS is a bug for bug copy of CP/M. If that doesn't make it an 8-bit operating system for you, you're listening to too much propoganda. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .