Hi, I suggest that you link or mirror the amendmend of case 2:96CV645B, MS <-> Caldera, about MS pushing DRI out of the market (and playing dirty tricks with Novell when they bought DRDOS, and so on, not to mention many other things like OEM tricks, vaporware, simulated incompatibility...). In the end, Caldera bought it, called it OpenDOS, got some cash from the court but never enforced the other things (no "per CPU even if it is not with MS DOS" OEM prices, no "MSDOS+Win3.1 cheaper than Win3.1+DRDOS, although DRDOS cheaper than MSDOS" OEM prices, no hidden APIs, no pretend- to-be-incompatible APIs, ...). Pity. Basically Win95 included DOS, so other DOSes got pointless. History is repeating with Netscape/MSIE and with Quicktime/ReapPlayer/MediaPlayer and with Java/NET, to mention only a few :-((.
http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/amendment.html
Hi Eric. I'm trying to figure out how this relates to FreeDOS, and why it should appear on FreeDOS.org. Maybe this would be more appropriate for the DRDOS/OpenDOS folks? Their web site is http://www.drdos.org and Florian is the webmaster there.
-jh
-- _____________________________________________________________________________ This email message has been automatically encrypted using ROT-26.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
