Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!hsi!springal
From: springal@hsi.UUCP (Rob Springall)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Multitasking version of MS-DOS?
Message-ID: <1130@hsi86.hsi.UUCP>
Date: 16 Feb 90 15:28:20 GMT
References: <1990Feb14.225742.20401@ccu.umanitoba.ca> <5261@ur-cc.UUCP>
Reply-To: springal@hsi.com (Rob Springall)
Organization: Health Systems Intl., New Haven, CT.
Lines: 22

In article <5261@ur-cc.UUCP> ttak@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Timothy Takahashi) writes:
>In article <1990Feb14.225742.20401@ccu.umanitoba.ca> umcarls9@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Charles Carlson) writes:
>>I have heard rumour several times, which people claim to be fact,
>>that a while ago, Microsoft released a multitasking version of MS-DOS
>>to the European market, in reponse to market competition there.  
>
>I seem to remember that one of the later versions of Concurrent CPM/86
>was repudedly MS-DOS compatible. Somehow, I doubt that MS-DOS compatible
>ment IBM compatible.

A few years ago (when 286s were all the rage) Digital Research came out with 
a Concurrent MS-DOS (or something like that).  As I remember, it let you have
four tasks loaded at one time and it time sliced in between them.  

The program was an absolute dog (VERY slow) and a kludge.  It was actually 
Concurrent CP/M-86 that was made to look like DOS.  All of the DOS commands 
that were internal became external, all the error messages were CP/M...  
Piece of garbage but my boss at the time was very high on CP/M and DR.
--
Rob Springall                                              springal@hsi.com
Health Systems International                 ...!{uunet, yale}!hsi!springal
New Haven, CT