HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: More advertising
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 15:54:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.135215.20084@panix.com> os2man@panix.com (Larry Salomon Jr.) writes:
>Since no one decided to respond to the initial advertising thread I attempted
>to start (maybe I tried it in comp.os.os2.misc?  I can't remember anymore...),
>I'll try with another one.  Again, I'm interested in reading any ad ideas you
>can come up with (and I know there are IBMers who read this and are probably
>interested also).  Here's the idea for this one:
>
><Radio ad>
>"With an operating system that can run all of your DOS, Windows, and OS/2
					^^^

	Pull this word.

>applications, using your computer is as simple as 1-2-3...or dBase IV...
>or Ami Pro...(start to fade) or CorelDraw...or Describe...or Microsoft Excel
>(etc. ad nauseum)"  Meanwhile, once the voice starts to fade you get the 
>overdubbed deeper voice (but not too deep) take the foreground:  "OS/2 2.0
>for your personal computer.  Requires an Intel or compatible 80386 or better
>CPU with 4 megabytes of memory and 30 megabytes hard disk space.  To order,
>call 1-800-3IBMOS2.  Product names are trademarks of their respective owners."


	Can't we be honest?  OS/2 takes more than 30 megs of HD space
	and a lot more than 4 megs of RAM.  This is part of the problem--
	you can't solve it by promoting the same lies.  Come on, OS/2
	*needs* at least 6 to function -- sluggishly! -- but 4 is a 
	joke (yes, I've tried it post SP).  If IBM would allow you to boot
	w/o the WPS, it might be better, but that pretty much makes the
	system useless.  (There's only so much benefit you get from OS/2
	wit one fullscreen prompt).

>As with the TV ad last time, this has a two page analogue for a magazine.  The
>first page would be the first voice, with the fade represented by continually
>shrinking point sizes and the second page would be the deeper voice.  I would
>use a white Helvetica font for the first page on a black background, and have
>the OS/2 logo in the middle of the second page with the type below it.


	Helvetica?  Boring.

	Frankly, if IBM wanted to make an impression, they'd hire
	the company that's handled Dell's ad campaign for the last
	year and a half.  I particularly liked the "last cheap shot"
	ones.


>What is something you can come up with?
>
>Cheers,
>Q
>-- 
>"If you choose not to decide, you  | "My other body is in the shop" - seen
> still have made a choice" - Rush  |  on a T-shirt
>------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
	Blaming society for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
	---
	Do I even need to point out that my views do not represent
	those of my employer, institution or relations?
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: pshuang@athena.mit.edu (Ping Huang)
Subject: Re: MS to 'support' OS/2?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	<1992Dec28.105039.6803@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk>
	<1hnk8nINNuh@flop.ENGR.ORST.EDU>
	<1992Dec29.174203.9145@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 03:25:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.174203.9145@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk> ucgadkw@ucl.ac.uk (Dominik Wujastyk) writes:

 > I'm pretty certain MS Word 5.5 doesn't support HPFS under OS/2, since
 > it is *really* an OS/2 1.x program, and I believe HPFS only came in
 > with 2.0. (Perhaps I'm wrong about that?)

The High Performance File System existed for OS/2 1.x, although I don't
remember if it shipped with 1.0 or was one of the enhancements that came
with 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3. You can find an article in Microsoft System
Journal by a Microsoft author extolling the virtues of HPFS and how the
engineers at Microsoft planned and did their very best to incorporate
New Technology (OK, I'm deliberately using words they didn't actually
use here....) into HPFS to ensure its viability into the 21st century,
or something to that effect. That should tell you just how old HPFS is,
if it pre-dates the official IBM-Microsoft break-up.

--
Ping Huang (INTERNET: pshuang@athena.mit.edu), probably speaking for himself

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Organization: Camosun College, Victoria B.C, Canada
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 22:42:55 GMT

philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
> In article <1992Dec29.194318.27886@spang.Camosun.BC.CA> dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) writes:
> >bobatk@microsoft.com (Bob Atkinson) writes:
> >:
> >: I'm confused; perhaps you can help me out of my confusion.
> >: 
> >: 	1. You have DR-DOS6.0, a clone of MSDOS.
> >: 	2. You buy Win3.1, an MS product that was designed to 
> >: 		work with MSDOS. And indeed it does, as you note.
> >: 	3. You find that Win3.1 doesn't work with DR-DOS6.0
> >: 
> >: Then: 
> >: 	4. You complain to MS, not DR, about the problem.
> >: 
> >: See my confusion? Doesn't the problem have to do with the fidelity
> >: of the MSDOS emulation done by DR-DOS? Or am I missing something?
> >: I'd genuinely like to know...
> >
> >And if the fact that DRDOS's emulation is imperfect because of
> >information held back by Mircrosoft?
> >
> 
>     Oh, this is rich.  The only way that DR-DOS could get perfect
> MS-DOS emulation is if they had the source code.  

Really? And presumably, by the same argument, the only way an AMD386
could provide perfect emulation of an Intel 386 is if AMD had access
to the original Intel drawings?

Never heard of functional specifications?

> This source
> code wasn't provided to them by Microsoft.   Therefore, Microsoft
> is a grand evil company for not turning over the hard work of
> hundreds of engineers to their competitors.

Nah, they're just evil, period.

--
Real:  Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept., Camosun College, Victoria B.C.
Email: (dbarker@spang.camosun.bc.ca)
Phone: +1 604 370 4452
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Date: 31 Dec 1992 04:23:16 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Dec31.033739.1912@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
>*sigh* If you want to be a dealer of McDonald's burgers you have to sign a
>deal with McDonald's not to sell Whoppers.  Is McDonald's liscencing
>agreements "sleezy and underhanded?"  Is this "strongarming Wendy's out of
>business?"  Is this putting the Colonel at an "unfair competitive
>disadvantage?"  Should sheriff FTC round up a possie on the Ponderosa?

YABA! (Yet another bogus analogy!)

If you want to be a dealer of McDonald's burgers, you agree to represent
yourself to the public as McDonald's. Selling a Whopper from a McDonald's
restaurant would be extremely confusing to the public.

In contrast, when Zeos agreed to bundle DOS and Windows with all machines they
sold, they didn't magically become "Microsoft Computers, Inc.".

Next? Or are you going to actuially argue the issue of MS' sleazy practices
for once?
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
 "Brought to you by the letters O, S, and by the number 2." -- Mike Levis
From: merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Academic Marketplace -- OS/2 2.1 as "The Scholar's Workstation"
Date: 3 Jan 1993 14:16:51 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: neuro.usc.edu

Some years ago Steve Jobs tried to market the Next computer system
to those of in academia as "The Scholar's Workstation."  He failed.
Why?  Well, in large part because the cost per seat for his system
was far too high to be effectively absorbed by either our central
campus, departmental, grant, or personal budgets.  

One way for IBM to get into the academic marketplace -- and thereby
bootstrap followon sales by graduating students familiar with OS/2
-- would be to create an attractively priced integrated platform to
include OS/2 2.1, TCP/IP, PMX (X Windows Server), sendmail compliant
email and maybe a few small applets including professor's gradebooks.
Then IBM could sell these packages to campuses as a very inexpensive
Scholar's Workstation upgrade to what are for most of our professors
386SX (or better) workstations.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Jeremy_Reimer@mindlink.bc.ca (Jeremy Reimer)
Subject: Re: OS/2 Commercial
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 10:27:39 GMT

> Phil Scarr writes:
>
> Msg-ID: <1993Jan1.225356.7143@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
> Posted: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 22:53:56
>
> Org.  : Neuroclinical Trials Center, University of Virginia
>
> In article <C074MM.CJG@ecf.toronto.edu> dhaliwa@ecf.toronto.edu (DHALIWAL
> BIKRAM SINGH) writes:
> >At the beginning of Star Trek (broadcast nightly here in Toronto at
> >7:00 pm) IBM had a OS/2 commercial on.  The commercial revolves around
> >a pool table with balls being pocketed as the announcer espouses all
> >of OS/2 virtues (ie. true multitasking, GUI etc.).  I agree it is
> >attention getting, and I think it is effective in its simplicity.
> >If anyone else has seen the commercial, what do you think?
> >
> >--
> >
> >.............................................
> > Bikram Dhaliwal (dhaliwa@civ.toronto.edu)
> > Toronto        (dhaliwa@ecf.toronto.edu)
>
> BLEAH!  I thought it was TERRIBLE!  Typical IBM soft-sell dreary ad.
> Why is it that Apple ads show computers, Microsoft ads show computers,
> but IBM ads show POOL TABLES????  How useless.  How typical.
>
>         -Phil


I agree.  All they need to do (in my highly demented opinion, admittedly) is
show someone playing Wing Commander (obviously they would have to pay a fee
to Origin, so this would never happen) and then someone walks in and wants
something, so the player just hits ALT-HOME... then we see a cool OS/2 screen
with pulse, chess playing and Wing is still going in the little window (the
32-bit GRE would help here, and a SVGA driver...)

Hell, that's all it took to convince ME!  :)  Wordprocessing, modemming and
games.  I wanted to run them all at once.  Windoze wouldn't, no matter how
hard I tried.  OS/2 did.

Just seeing Wing being played full-screen to a national audience would
probably make Nintendo sales plummet!

Jeremy (who just wants to blow away Kilrathi and be home in time for dinner,
modemming and a wordprocessing!)






--
Jeremy_Reimer@ |"It turned out, as N-Man discovered later, that the black
mindlink.bc.ca | boat hadn't been after him at all.  It was full of riotous,
---------------| unemployed former James Bond villains enraged at the fall
aka THE JAGUAR!| of Communism in the Soviet Union."
---------------|
Stealth Sig#69 |  --From "N-Man #3: N-Man on Holiday"

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: "richard anstruther" <richard.anstruther@canrem.com>
Subject: ftc and ms
Reply-To: "richard anstruther" <richard.anstruther@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: comp
Date: 21 Dec 92 09:07:49 EST

-> From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)

-> |> to leverage other companies' apps out of the
-> |> marketplace by giving its own application programmers the inside
-> |> track to upcoming changes and undocumented features in the OS.
-> Would somebody please tell me exactly what is wrong with that?
-> Besides whining "its not _fair_!!!"  Microsoft owns Windows and DOS.
-> What Microsoft wants to reveal or not reveal isn't anybody's business
-> but Microsofts.

What's wrong with it is that it is illegal and has been for a long
time.  If you mean what is wrong with it in a moral sense, no doubt
a lengthy debate is possible, like it is with most moral questions.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communist
Date: 30 Dec 92 19:05:50 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
NNTP-Posting-Host: neuron.tamu.edu

In article <1992Dec29.210340.10425@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
|     What is your suggestion?  Do you believe that Microsoft
|should offer the lowest current price regardless of the volume
|or licensing agreement entered into?

That would be nice. :-)

However, its not realistic.  What would be reasonable is to offer a
license price as a function of licenses sold, not as a function of
machines sold.  If the number of people wanting MS products is really
that great, there would be no difference to MS--and those few who
wanted something else would have nothing to complain about.
   -- Bruce


--
Bruce Dubbs                   |  Oxymorons of note:
bdubbs@neuron.tamu.edu        |  Honest Politician, Political Science,
                              |  Scrupulous Lawyer
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:10791 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3379
From: rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
Date: 22 Dec 92 21:40:57 GMT
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.

bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:

>In article <Bzn0EI.D2w@csulb.edu> sichermn@csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes:


>If MS is capable of keeping prices down for the customer, why
>should _they_ be penalized and not the less efficient companies ? 

I think you should dabble a bit more in economics.  MS has had ZERO to
do with the down-pricing of computers.  They have had little to
do with OS's, also.  DOS was a hack, procured from another company
which in turn borrowed it from a third.  The most major change was
the 'UNIX-ification' of DOS, i.e., they borrowed heavily from another
OS.  NT will be the first truly MS-written OS.  Even that has
borrowed heavily from others (Mach from CMU, etc.).

The downturn on pricing has to do with hardware competition, and has
nothing to do with MS.  PC prices remained artificially high for a 
long time due to the monopoly that Intel held on the CPU market. 
Once Cyrix, AMD, C&T, and others started cloning the Intel chips,
the basic price of the chips plummeted.  Prices dropped, new
companies started selling, prices dropped further, you had more
competition, and now we are at a point that the prices seem to have 
hit near the bottom.  This is totally OS independent; the drop in
component prices with the increased competition from PC hardware
vendors has forced Apple and UNIX workstation vendors to drop their
prices, also.  MS has been the benficiary of this, not the
cause.  In fact, MS has long been one of the holdouts on reasonable
pricing of software.  It has taken the Phillipe Kahn's of the world
to force them to lower their prices.

>>-- 
>>Jeff Sicherman
>>up the net without a .sig

>Dov
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 16:47:34 GMT

In <1992Dec31.040712.3797@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:

>In article <8256@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec30.190050.26854@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
>>
>>Right. Then we can ALL go to work for MS, just like you're evidently trying to
>>do.

>     Jay, this tactic of branding everyone who doesn't agree with you
>as "trying to work for MS" is getting really tiresome.  If you can't
>address the points made in the posts, why bother to post this kind
>of drivel?

So when are YOU going to start "trying to work for MS", Phil?

[For the absolutely humour-impaired -- ;-) ;-) ;-)]

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: More advertising
Date: 30 Dec 1992 14:02:28 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Dec29.181546.1151@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>	So we're agreed that using the word "all" is a lie, right?  So
>	*pull the word*.

As I said, you're being unnecessarily pedantic, especially in light of other
OS ads which say the same thing. I'll buy that only if you'll argue the same
thing for all other OSes out there.

>	Sure, if you choose to forego DOS or Windows support.  Note that
>	I am aware that you can do without all of the piggish junk that
>	OS/2 installs--chess, terminal, blah--but OS/2 + DOS + WIN + Swap
>	isgoing to be 30 megs or more-- a LOT more on a 4 or 6 meg 
>	system.

Nope. Several other folks have already posted that they do just fine in a 30
meg partition. I did a full install, and fit it all into a 40 meg partition
with 9 meg left over.

>	Bullshit.  OS/2 in 6 "works" but it does not "work just fine".
>	It's sluggish, and it runs the DOS and Windows programs promoted
>	above dog slow.  Still, like I said, change it to 6 (instead of
>	four) and I would have no objection.  Imagine the ridicule MS
>	would get if they promoted Windows 3.1 on a 8 mhz AT with 2 megs
>	of RAM. 

Again, other folks have already refuted this one. OS/2 works just fine in 6
meg.

[about SET RUNWORKPLACE=CMD.EXE]
>	OTOH, it also makes the system a pain in the ass to use.  IBM 
>	needs to come out with an alternative, non-piggish fewer-featured
>	shell if they want to make 4 and 6 meg users really happy.  

How does it make the system a pain in the ass to use? If you want GUI
functionality, run WPS. If you don't, don't run it. If you don't want it, then
don't complain that you don't get it.

>	They've done a so/so job with the SP--it certainly performs better
>	under 4 megs than the GA did, but better than "useless garbage"
>	is still not very good.  Maybe "bearable to play with but useless
>	for general work" is a good way to describe the SP on 4 megs.

IYHO, please. Others have reported that they're happy with how it runs in 4
meg.

[BTW, quoting others' .signatures is a useless waste of bandwidth.]
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
 "Brought to you by the letters O, S, and by the number 2." -- Mike Levis
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: robert.heuman@rose.com (robert heuman)
Subject: FCC will proclaim Mic
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 00:04:09 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 12-29-92 18:54
helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) wrote
in <1992Dec28.232207.1612@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>

H(> Please try again:  Can you name a real, genuine, monopoly in _any_ 
country 
H(> at _any_ time (before or after antitrust legislation or in a country without 
H(> antitrust legislation) that wasn't created by a government?  You can't
H(> do it because there never has been such a beast.  Markets which the goverment
H(> stays out of are very harsh on monopolies.

This is off topic, but to name one that is damn close to a monopoly, 
try the DuBeers Diamond Cartel.  Another that came very close was INCO 
due to the large quantity of nickel in Sudbury, ON.  There have also 
been national monopolies, such as silk in China in the early middle 
ages, which were NOT created by government, but permitted to 
continue, or actively supported, by the government AFTER their 
creation.  Lets DROP this side-issue.

Bob
---
   RoseReader 1.70 P001886: This Canadian has an Opinion...His Own!
   RM 2.00 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft the next Standard Oil?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 14:07:13 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.053145.3332@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
>In article <1htv10INNp6c@tamsun.tamu.edu>, bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs) writes:
>|> You still don't get it.  As soon as the competitors are forced to
>|> liquidate, the prices go up. 


	If the prices go up, competitors will return, because they have
	a chance to make money.

	Also, as new technologies come along, competition pops up.
	For instance, pen-based operating systems.  MS hardly has any
	real lead there.  It's just as likely that Windows for Pen 
	will flop inthe face of PenGeos, or Pen Corp's product.

>With OS/2 selling at a rate of 2 million copies a year, nobody is in any
>danger of liquidation.  


	Perhaps, but hopefully Pink/Taligent and the PowerPC will do
	better, if just to help IBM and Apple.  I find it *very* disconcerting
	that IBM is doing the stereotypical American company thing--
	they're cutting $1 billion in R&D over the next 12 months.



>|> I don't want MS to control.  I don't want IBM to control.  I don't
>|> want one of the Unix variants to control.  I want them all to exist.
>
>They will!!  Neither IBM nor Sun nor NeXT are in any danger of going
>bankrupt.  


	It is my understanding that Sun has put almost all of 
	it's eggs in one basket with Solaris and that it's alienating
	a lot of users.  It's a risky time for Sun.

	NeXt, too.  If NS486 fails to have at least moderate success,
	NeXT is going to have a lot of trouble repaying Canon for all
	of themoney they've been pouring into next lately.


>If Novell can purchase UNiX from USL, then they surely arn't
>in financial difficulties.  Word Perfect still sells more copies than
>Microsoft Word.  Lotus is King of spreadsheets, and Borland just about has
>the database picture locked up.

	All ofthese companies are hugeies, too.  Somehow, I wish we had
	a wee bit more diversity.  But I suppose that's unlikely, the price
	of SW development and support has gotten pretty extreme.


-- 
	Blaming society for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
	         ---  Boycott == censorship == cowardice  ---
	Do I even need to point out that my views do not represent
	those of my employer, institution or relations?
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Date: 04 Jan 93 04:26:48 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <8290@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1993Jan01.191432.10082@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec31.224255.27090@spang.Camosun.BC.CA> dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) writes:
>>>Really? And presumably, by the same argument, the only way an AMD386
>>>could provide perfect emulation of an Intel 386 is if AMD had access
>>>to the original Intel drawings?
>>     Yes!  That's exactly my point.  They can get close, but they
>>aren't going to be 100% the same as Intel unless, well, they are
>>100% the same.
>
>Tell that to Hitachi Data Systems and Amdahl; they produce 100% System/370
>compatible mainframes from nothing more than the published functional specs
>(primarily, the System/370 Principles of Operation series).

    Until someone discovers a difference.


>>>Never heard of functional specifications?
>>   Of course I have.  This is why I can't understand when people
>>complain to Microsoft because DR-DOS didn't meet them exactly.
>
>The only reason DR-DOS doesn't meet them exactly, in your view, is that there
>are interfaces to the DOS that MS uses that aren't published.

     Here's a question for you:  Why is Microsoft responsible for
publishing _all_ of the interfaces to MS-DOS?

				-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.