Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!ames!sri-spam!rutgers!super.upenn.edu!eecae!conklin
From: conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.tandy
Subject: Re: A Matter Of Taste
Message-ID: <5023@eecae.UUCP>
Date: 23 Dec 87 00:35:27 GMT
References: <1250@vu-vlsi.UUCP>
Reply-To: conklin@eecae.UUCP (Terry Conklin)
Organization: Michigan State Univ., Engineering, E. Lansing
Lines: 11
Keywords: TRSDOS clones quite respectable

Indeed, George is correct. The reference "trashdos" is highly
inaccurate, since A.) FEW Mod I/III owners use real RS-TRSDOS and B.)
Most TRSDOS replacements (notably Multidos, Newdos80, etc.) were
terribly sophisticated and were very much more advanced than for example
PC-DOS 3.0 (3.3 is getting pretty involved in it's own right.) TRS-DOS
(even the original!) Provides for multitasking through interrupt service
tables, variable length records, and mainframe-style multiple-level
multiple password protection for files. Very useful features, 
none of which are in other micro doses. (Not counting Amiga's.)
Execute only runtime protection even extended into BASIC programs, which
would not list or run. (EITHER from DOS or BASIC.)