Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:15316 comp.os.misc:428
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!stc!idec!camcon!igp
From: igp@camcon.uucp (Ian Phillipps)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.os.misc
Subject: Re: Wanted: reports on Concurrent DOS
Message-ID: <1436@titan.camcon.uucp>
Date: 4 May 88 10:19:35 GMT
References: <614@speedy.mcnc.org>
Organization: Cambridge Consultants Ltd., Cambridge, UK
Lines: 28

From article <614@speedy.mcnc.org>, by mru@mcnc.org (Markus Ruppel):
>> Keith Ericson  at TekLabs (resident factious factotum)
>> Tektronix, PO 500, MS 58-383   Beaverton OR 97077    (503)627-6042
>> UUCP:	[uunet|ucbvax|decvax|ihnp4|hplabs]!tektronix!tekgvs!keithe
>> ARPA:	keithe%tekgvs.TEK.COM@RELAY.CS.NET
>> CSNet:	keithe@tekgvs.TEK.COM
> 
> Keith, I do not know why CDOS doesn't get the audience it certainly 
> deserves, BUT it is one of the best OS's ( THE BEST ??? ) for the
> Intel 80x86 series available.

I evaluated CDOS-XM (version 5.1 I think); it seemed ok but not what we were
looking for at the time.

HOWEVER - it did trash a hard disk formatted by MSDOS 3.x.  The product did
announce DOS 2 compatibility. What that meant was that if presented with a
disk with 16-bit FAT entries (a DOS 3 extension) it just screwed the disk up
rather than saying "I don't understand this disk".

Now, CDOS 5.1 was released well after DOS 3. You'd think they could have at
least put in a tripwire in the program to stop this happening. It gave me a
bad feeling about the whole system.

Oh yes - I did have a backup of the disk!
-- 
UUCP:  ...!ukc!camcon!igp | Cambridge Consultants Ltd  |  Ian Phillipps
or:    igp@camcon.uucp    | Science Park, Milton Road  |-----------------
Phone: +44 223 358855     | Cambridge CB4 4DW, England |