Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cadovax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cadovax!keithd
From: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.wanted,net.usoft
Subject: Re: Multitasking under/with PCDOS
Message-ID: <387@cadovax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Jan-85 15:12:39 EST
Article-I.D.: cadovax.387
Posted: Tue Jan 29 15:12:39 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Feb-85 09:44:39 EST
References: <589@afinitc.UUCP>
Organization: Contel Cado, Torrance, CA
Lines: 23
Xref: watmath net.micro.pc:3241 net.wanted:5683 net.usoft:74

[.......]
>Digital Research's Concurrent DOS comes to mind, but I think that there
>may be some compatibility problems running ordinary PCDOS programs under
>Concurrent.

>Can anyone recommend (and I know that someone will) a multitasking
>environment that is compatible with PCDOS.  (And if you know the price
>please include it.)

Yes, Concurrent DOS has some compatibility problems.  However, I would
expect that ANY multitasking environment would have SOME compatibility
problems, as it will not be 100% the same as PCDOS.  You might
re-consider Concurrent DOS even if you find other solutions, as
it is a BREEZE to use when the packages are compatible.  I would expect
more compatibility as time goes on, applications vendors are becoming
more and more inspired to provide compatibility across various 
hardware and software clones.  After all, why limit your market, when
all you have to do is write 'well-behaved' applications.

Keith Doyle
{ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd
"You'll PAY to know what you REALLY think!"