[OT] Re: Microsoft and Xenix.

2001-06-24 Thread Michal Jaegermann
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:20:40AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Sunday 24 June 2001 12:36, Rob Landley wrote: > > On Saturday 23 June 2001 22:47, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > GEM was a gui from Digital Research I believe. > > > Geoworks/Geos was a seperate entity. > > > > Ah, the DR-DOS

[OT] Re: Microsoft and Xenix.

2001-06-24 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Sunday 24 June 2001 12:36, Rob Landley wrote: > On Saturday 23 June 2001 22:47, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > GEM was a gui from Digital Research I believe. > > Geoworks/Geos was a seperate entity. > > Ah, the DR-DOS answer to dosshell/windows. Cool. (I used Dr. Dos byt > never tried its

[OT] Re: Microsoft and Xenix.

2001-06-24 Thread Daniel Phillips
On Sunday 24 June 2001 12:36, Rob Landley wrote: On Saturday 23 June 2001 22:47, Eric W. Biederman wrote: GEM was a gui from Digital Research I believe. Geoworks/Geos was a seperate entity. Ah, the DR-DOS answer to dosshell/windows. Cool. (I used Dr. Dos byt never tried its gui.) GEM

[OT] Re: Microsoft and Xenix.

2001-06-24 Thread Michal Jaegermann
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:20:40AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: On Sunday 24 June 2001 12:36, Rob Landley wrote: On Saturday 23 June 2001 22:47, Eric W. Biederman wrote: GEM was a gui from Digital Research I believe. Geoworks/Geos was a seperate entity. Ah, the DR-DOS answer to