Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site drivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!sun!amdahl!drivax!holloway
From: holloway@drivax.UUCP (Bruce Holloway)
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari16
Subject: Re: (none)
Message-ID: <327@drivax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 15:07:37 EST
Article-I.D.: drivax.327
Posted: Mon Mar 10 15:07:37 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 22:32:30 EST
References: <94469@UB-MTS>
Reply-To: holloway@drivax.UUCP (Bruce Holloway)
Organization: Digital Research, Monterey, CA
Lines: 23

In article <94469@UB-MTS> Terry_Conklin%UB-MTS%UMich-MTS.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA writes:
>   However, I guess what my friend and I both feel was basically
>correct. Atari did NOT write TOS, it modified CP/M68k. While I
>realize writing an OS is no small feat, I think where the question
>came in is that it was so vehemently stated that TOS is not CP/M68k
>that we were under the impression that it was supposed to be
>a total rewrite (effectively) which resembled it.

TOS was a total rewrite, NOT a modification of CP/M-68K in any form nor
fashion, no sources were the same, different from the ground up. And DRI
did it.

-- 

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Whatever I write are not the opinions or policies of Digital Research, Inc.,|
|and probably won't be in the foreseeable future.                            |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Bruce Holloway

....!ucbvax!hplabs!amdahl!drivax!holloway
(I'm not THAT Bruce Holloway, I'm the other one.)