Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!yunexus!maccs!cs4g6ag
From: cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: distinguishing between MS and IBM(PC) DOS
Message-ID: <25CB4BA9.20632@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
Date: 3 Feb 90 21:22:49 GMT
References: <5134@solo6.cs.vu.nl> <261@utrcu1.UUCP> <2638@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> <1937@bucket.UUCP>
Reply-To: cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn)
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario
Lines: 18

In article <1937@bucket.UUCP> leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) writes:
$kaleb@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley) writes:
$>Which means that Olivetti licensed it's DOS from IBM rather than Microsoft,
$>therefore, it's really PC-DOS instead of MS-DOS.
$And I suppose Compaq and Tandy licensed theirs from IBM too? Nope. They
$do this so that you can upgrade from their DOS to PC-DOS (or vice-versa)
$without having to know arcane tricks like renaming hidden files.

   But why would they want you to be able to upgrade to someone else's
DOS?  If you want to upgrade to anything other than another version of
their own DOS, it would seem to me that you'd want Microsoft's version
rather than IBM's.

-- 
Stephen M. Dunn                               cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
          <std_disclaimer.h> = "\nI'm only an undergraduate!!!\n";
****************************************************************************
       "I want to look at life - In the available light" - Neil Peart