John W. Kennedy wrote: > IBM was genuinely innovative, and did their best to provide value for > money. Microsoft hasn't been able to produce anything but me-too > products since the 80's. (Multiplan, Word for DOS, the QBASIC engine, > early sponsorship of mouses, and the gutsy decision to morph MS-DOS > 1.0, > a CP/M quasi-clone, into DOS 2.0, a Unix quasi-clone, are about all I > can give them credit for.)
You're suggesting MS stands for 'Mimick or Steal', right? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
