Re: conversion & stuff

[cschroed@hercii_31hercii.lasc.lockheed.com (Curt Schroeder)]

In article <9405061832.AA26860@tjhsst.vak12ed.edu>, revry@TJHSST.VAK12ED.EDU ("Ronald A. Evry ", Ronald) writes:

|> [snip, snip, snip] I'm old
|> enough to remember C/PM and as far as I'm concerned, the major
|> failing of
|> MS-DOS machines is that the operating system is based on that
|> convoluted,
|> unfriendly, awkward language.
|> 
Bzzt...MS-DOS did NOT evolve from CP/M.  CP/M was a competitor to MS-DOS (then
known as PC-DOS, if memory serves).  IBM went to DRI and asked them to make some
modifications to CP/M for the IBM PC version.  DRI was busy getting CP/M 3.0 out
the door and said they were too busy.  So IBM went to visit Mr. Gates, who _was_
willing to make changes in the time frame that IBM wanted.  The rest, sadly, is
history...  :-(

The only place that CP/M is user hostile, IMHO, is in the hardware configuration
department.  But, MS-DOS today isn't exactly user friendly in this area either.

I have only just started to use it, but NZ-COM (formerly known as ZCPR) on top of
CP/M 2.2 is _slick_, and is a hacker's dream 8-bit OS!  It is the ultimate in
being customizable!  =)

|> I'll stick with my forgotten machine and do very nicely, thanks.
|> Ron

Me too...my eleven year old II+, along with my Microsoft Softcard, suit me quite
well.

Curt
-- 

Curt Schroeder                        | cschroed@hercii.lasc.lockheed.com
Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Company | marylynn@netcom.com (lasc prefered)
======================================|====================================
These opinions are mine, mine, mine!  |    --- Apple II Forever! ---