home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:11354 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3598
- 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: <1993Jan01.191432.10082@microsoft.com>
- Date: 01 Jan 93 19:14:32 GMT
- Organization: Microsoft Corporation
- References: <1992Dec31.035545.3621@microsoft.com> <1992Dec31.224255.27090@spang.Camosun.BC.CA>
- Lines: 28
-
- In article <1992Dec31.224255.27090@spang.Camosun.BC.CA> dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) writes:
- >philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
- >> In article <1992Dec29.194318.27886@spang.Camosun.BC.CA> dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) writes:
- >> >
- >> >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?
-
- 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.
-
-
- >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.
-
- -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.
-