I dunno. Jon Perryman said they had DOS and they let it go to Microsoft during other negotiations; I just took it from there.
--- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* You might be a physics major if, when your professor asks you where your homework is, you claim accidentally to have determined its momentum so precisely that according to Heisenberg it could be anywhere in the universe. */ -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Grant Taylor Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 18:15 My hang up is that -- as I understand it -- DOS was /never/ IBM's to start with. DOS was /Microsoft's/. Or are you suggesting that IBM should have purchased exclusive rights to use / distribute / etc DOS from Microsoft? --- On 8/14/23 3:16 PM, Bob Bridges wrote: > I sort of agree, but I think underneath we still disagree. I agree > that IBM didn't think the PC software was worth developing. And if > they had held onto MS-DOS and approached its development in the same > way that Microsoft did, sure, they'd probably be worth bazillions. -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Jon Perryman Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 00:25 Stories vary widely but the most prevalent can be seen at https://youtu.be/Qc5khH5gllg?t=339 which I positioned around the relevant time. The story goes that MS-DOS did not exist at that time and IBM could have required exclusive rights but instead intentionally gave up its exclusive rights to MS-DOS for $0 during negotiations. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
