[Rhodes22-list] Apple virtuality

[Bill Effros]

As I remember it, Microsoft bought the rights to Seattle DOS.  IBM 
wanted to go with a 16-bit version of CP/M, but Digital Research was 
unable to deliver a backwardly compatible version on a timely basis, so 
they went with Microsoft, and forced everyone to buy new software.  
Seattle Microsystems retained the right to sell their own version of 
their DOS.  Apple survived only because VisiCalc ran only on the Apple.  
Microsoft prospered only because they retained the right to sell IBM-DOS 
as MS-DOS.  Microsoft only got this right because IBM was in the midst 
of antitrust suits filed by the federal government.  The original PC was 
a "poison the well" computer system designed to kill the microcomputer 
market segment.  IBM never expected it to succeed in its own right.  
Originally Lotus1-2-3 only worked on PCs manufactured by IBMs running 
IBM-DOS.  Microsoft knocked it off, along with a wordprocessing program 
to provide top-tier software for both Apple, and PC "clones".

At least that's the way I remember it -- no time to look it up now.

Bill Effros

Robert Skinner wrote:
> Thank you, Ron, for the scoop on Mac virtuality.
>
> After an horrible experience trying to do some modeling 
> on an Apple 2 in Apple BASIC, I jumped to CP/M, then
> MP/M, writing a task dispatcher for the latter ill-fated OS.
>
> When the PC came out using the Seattle Microsystems DOS-86 
> (skillfully ripped off and relabeled by Gates), I was a 
> bit concerned, having been abused by Gates' FORTRAN for 
> CP/M.  I have had to stay on board with the MS progression 
> of DOS to Windows because of customer's requirements for 
> the wide range of software that runs on Windows.
>
> Windows has degenerated into a magnet for malware, and the
> increasingly invasive character of Windows is even more
> off-putting.  The lack of a secure kernel is a major
> design flaw -- no amount of lipstick will make that pig
> attractive.  I don't know how the designer of the elegant
> VAX VMS operating system could have allowed that.
>
> The advent of fully functional and very useful LINUX has 
> opened a lot of doors, and the fusion of capabilities 
> offered on the Apple platform is the icing on the cake.  
> I wonder how long it will be before we see a universal 
> platform and Apple's progression toward being an OS and 
> commodity electronics shop?
>
> /Robert
>
> Ronald Lipton wrote:
>   
>> Mr Lipton?
>>
>> Fermi Linux is a home grown version of Red Hat.  It's used for the
>> computer "farms" which are used for data analysis and
>> acquisition.  The farms are typically a few hundred machines.  We
>> actually tried windows for a while on one system and it was a complete
>> disaster.
>>
>> I have run Linux and Windows simultaneously on different windows on the
>> Mac without any problems - but I didn't really do anything with them
>> - just
>> tried it to see if it really worked.
>>
>> Parallels allows Windows and the Mac to share a folder, but not the full
>> file system.  That feature is not available for Linux.
>>
>> Ron
>> On Mar 1, 2007, at 8:17 PM, Robert Skinner wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Thank you, Mr. Lipton.
>>>
>>> I am guessing that Fermi LINUX is grown in Fermi Labs?
>>>
>>> The rest of the info is quite illuminating - that XP
>>> is happy without having its own dedicated hardware is
>>> quite a testament to the "parallels Desktop".
>>>
>>> Can LINUX and XP be executing simultaneously?
>>>
>>> Can they share file systems?
>>>
>>> If you can spare a minute...
>>> /Robert
>>> --------------------------------------------------------
>>> Ronald Lipton wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I am using parallels Desktop.  The parallels software is pretty
>>>> transparent.  The internet
>>>> connections are passed though.  You can't tell it's an Apple if you
>>>> don't look at the
>>>> case. I installed windows XP, and registered it normally. I use Fermi
>>>> Scientific Linux,
>>>> which is a home grown extension of Red Hat.
>>>>
>>>> Ron
>>>> On Mar 1, 2007, at 5:02 PM, Robert Skinner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Ronald Lipton wrote:
>>>>>           
>>>>>> ... I have
>>>>>> windows and Linux installed and can run them as virtual machines...
>>>>>>             
>>>>> Very interesting -- and it raises questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> * What virtual engine are you using?
>>>>> * Are you running stock Windows?
>>>>>    - if so,
>>>>>         = what version?
>>>>>         = does it "phone home?"
>>>>>    - if not, what package?
>>>>> * What version of LINUX are you using?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope you can spare a moment to help w/ answers.
>>>>>
>>>>> thank you,
>>>>> /Robert
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>           
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>         
>>> --
>>> Robert Skinner               "Squirrel Haven"
>>> 9 Gateway Commons, Gorham, Maine   04038-1331
>>> Home/Messages 207-839-8777, Cell 207-653-1752
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>       
>> __________________________________________________
>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>     
>
>