Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!husc6!necntc!custom!boykin
From: boykin@custom.UUCP (Joseph Boykin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Intel Microprocessors
Message-ID: <770@custom.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 7-Aug-87 18:15:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: custom.770
Posted: Fri Aug  7 18:15:07 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Aug-87 10:15:59 EDT
References: <1112@lznv.ATT.COM> <399@aucs.UUCP> <3225@cucca.columbia.edu> <412@parcvax.Xerox.COM>
Organization: Custom Software Systems; Natick, MA
Lines: 21
Summary: DOS 1.0 was SUPPOSED to look like CP/M!

In article <412@parcvax.Xerox.COM>, burton@parcvax.Xerox.COM (Philip M. Burton) writes:
> 
> Guys, you are missing the point. IBM obviously chose the 8086 because it was
> an easy upgrade from the 8080.  In fact DOS 1.0 had specific features that resembled
> CP/M 80.  DOS 1.0, crude as it was, was aneasier upgrade than CPM/80.

Humm, I may be wrong but you may also be missing the point.  DOS 1.0
(and its predessors) was written as a CP/M lookalike by Seattle
Computer Products (SCP) (and some consultants).  At the time SCP
came out with their 8086 S-100 board there was no operating system
available, so they wrote one to look (somewhat) like the most
popular micro-computer OS available (CP/M).  Microsoft
bought DOS when IBM came to them (and DRI) looking for an OS
for their new computer.

By the way, I have Q-DOS (what DOS was originally called!)
version 0.17 on 8 1/2" disks, can anyone out there beat that?!?

Joe Boykin
Custom Software Systems
...necntc!custom!boykin