From: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!info-cpm
Newsgroups: fa.info-cpm
Title: Re: CP/M 3.0
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.187
Posted: Thu Dec  2 13:06:36 1982
Received: Fri Dec  3 06:23:33 1982

>From RMS.G.BANDY.MIT-OZ@Mit-Ml  Thu Dec  2 12:49:06 1982
To: Li@Rutgers
Cc: info-cpm@BRL
In-Reply-To: Your message of 2-Dec-82 0048-EST
Via:  Mit-Ml; 2 Dec 82 6:00-EST
Via:  Brl; 2 Dec 82 6:11-EST
Via:  Brl-Bmd; 2 Dec 82 6:21-EST

cp/m isn't all that bad, and neither is DR, either.
i've seen marc - it's good (looks PRETTY much like
unix(tm), but nuttin beats a VAX (are we not men?)
running Berkeley 4.1), however, the cost of the system
required to run it (it would seem that with all the
disk acessing you gotta do, you'd almost HAVE to have
a big winnie and maybe a BIG in-memory buffer (>1mbyte).
cp/m is good for just what it was intended for - a program
loader. however, it *is* simple enough that you can
do neat things.

DR isn't all that bad, either. Their documentation may
look like it was `crypted, translated in swahili,
crypted again, then typed up by a blind monkey', but
it *still* is readable and understandable (hell, IBM
doc isn't too bad either, once you get used to it). They
will also talk to people on their tech hotline who have
legitimate problems (or seem to). BTW, the last four
digits of their phone number spells MAMA(!).

oh well. i don't hate dr, and they are useful (pl/i-80
is pretty damn good).
					-andy
-------