home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:11257 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3562
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
- Path: sparky!uunet!microsoft!wingnut!philipla
- From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
- Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
- Message-ID: <1992Dec31.035545.3621@microsoft.com>
- Date: 31 Dec 92 03:55:45 GMT
- Organization: Microsoft Corporation
- References: <1992Dec28.201454.20862@microsoft.com> <1992Dec29.194318.27886@spang.Camosun.BC.CA>
- Lines: 31
-
- 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. 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.
- Makes sense to me.
-
- -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.
-