nemesis wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> How recently has UNIX not used source distributions for programs? How
>> much UNIX shareware could you download as executables, say, in 1998?
> 
> I don't quite understand how this has to do with anything in the discussion.

Because you had lots of OSes called UNIX that weren't compatible with 
each other, even at the source level.  (See autoconf)

>> DOS, Win98, WinXP.
> 
> Win9x did not support DOS programs: they simply had DOS included to handle
> those.

DOS programs ran in a window, just like they do now.

> Single vendor, single solution.

Yes? So?

> 
>> And before you say "Windows NT is the same OS as Windows 98", remember
>> all the people that accuse MS of stealing Windows NT from DEC? :-)
> 
> WNT <- VMS
> 
> same engineer...

So, different operating systems. You're making my point for me. :-)

>> Show me an executable that runs on TRS-DOS and CP/M?
> 
> Thank God the industry has settled on standards for interoperation.

Yep.

>> If what you're saying is that MS being a monopoly is what made this
>> possible, then sure, I might agree with that.
> 
> yes, that's it exactly.

So you agree with me, but think MS is bad. OK. I'm not disputing MS is 
bad. (Not agreeing, but not disputing. That's just a different 
conversation.)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message