logoalt Hacker News

codebjetoday at 2:41 AM2 repliesview on HN

CP/M-86 was definitely a thing, but CP/M-386 was not. By the time the 386 existed, DRI had dropped the CP/M name in favour of Concurrent DOS - though they had MS-DOS compatibility in Concurrent CP/M - and, as you say, eventually renamed it to DR-DOS.

Much as I loved DR-DOS, it did have occasional compatibility hiccups.


Replies

lproventoday at 1:49 PM

> Much as I loved DR-DOS, it did have occasional compatibility hiccups.

Because MS carefully built them. This was proved in court.

The developers who built the incompatibilities signed their work with their initials: AARD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code

How it was found:

https://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/archive/aard/ind...

m132today at 5:39 AM

Chances are those hiccups weren't without a reason!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Allchin#Controversies

show 1 reply