Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ncar!tank!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!osiris.cso.uiuc.edu!hamilton
From: hamilton@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: pre 1983 computers / Borland Pa
Message-ID: <7700078@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 2 Nov 88 00:05:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: osiris.7700078
References: <10@cpro.UUCP>
Lines: 28
Nf-ID: #R:cpro.UUCP:10:osiris.cso.uiuc.edu:7700078:000:1444
Nf-From: osiris.cso.uiuc.edu!hamilton    Nov  1 18:05:00 1988


asgard@cpro says:
> In article <190@imspw6.UUCP>, bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) writes:
> ;  J.R. Stoner: COG Gateway, Hayward, CA writes:
> ; >In 1982 CompuPro introduced a multiple-user system based on the dual
> ; >processor (85/88) which ran Concurrent CPM release 3.1 as its native OS
> ; >starting about 1985.  This was essentially "compatible" to the DOS 1.1
> ; >level, meaning some INT21 functions worked as they would on your XT.
> ;
> ; and goes on to fault Borland for not supporting this device with Turbo
> ; Pascal versions beyond 3.0.  I've got to confess here,  Turbo Pascal 4.1
> ; doesn't run on my old slide-rule either;  I can't begin to tell you how
> ; much sleep I've lost over this.
> ; Ted Holden
> 
> However, if you had read my original posting, you would have seen that TURBO
> did run correctly in a prior version of their compiler and their change to
> 3.1 essentially broke what used to be a working and useful tool for what
> appeared to be no reasons.
> 
huh?  did 3.1 jump out of the box and reformat your 3.0 disk?  did someone
hold a gun to your head to force you to throw 3.0 away?  if 3.0 was a working
and useful tool before 3.1, what made it unworking or useless afterward?

	wayne hamilton
	U of Il and US Army Corps of Engineers CERL
UUCP:	{convex,uunet}!uiucuxc!osiris!hamilton
ARPA:	hamilton@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu	USMail:	Box 476, Urbana, IL 61801
CSNET:	hamilton%osiris@uiuc.csnet	Phone:	(217)333-8703