Kelli Halliburton wrote:
Exegete wrote:Few people would run and and spend $3,000 for an IBM PC/XT just so they could run CP/M - esp. since they had to buy extra hardware in order to be able to do that.Actually, no, they didn't. There was a native version of CP/M for the PC. It was called -- now get this -- "CP/M-86 for the IBM PC." IBM, they sure were creative at naming things, weren't they? ;) Of course, if they wanted to run any of the hundreds of CP/M-80 progams, then yes, you are correct; they would have had to buy a coprocessor card. Much like the Z-80 cards available for the ][.
Which was the point. Obviously. Don't feel bad, Paul S. didn't "get it" either.I was fully aware of CP/M-86, just as I am aware of CP/M-68K. But neither ran the thousands of CP/M-80 programs.
So I repeat, you wouldn't run out and spend $3,000 for an IBM PC/XT, just so you could then buy a card that gave you a Z-80 so you could run CP/M.
If you wanted to run CP/M, you ran out and spent c. $1,500 on a Kaypro II, and got a library of top notch CP/M software thrown in for free.
Roy -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----