CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle.

From	Jeff-Relf.Me @.
Message-ID	<Jeff-Relf.Me@Jan.17--11.56am.Seattle.2019> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <46de3fb3-254f-46a1-978c-bf916f86c3e7@googlegroups.com> <q13tsh$1jje$3@gioia.aioe.org> <79cfd8a7-b374-46de-890d-9e991dc48fa6@googlegroups.com> <a5be72a5-3fcf-4af5-941d-0dccc0f22d57@googlegroups.com> <3e2414e2-1a14-4584-8529-af6598ef38b2@googlegroups.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics, comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject	CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle.
Organization	blocknews - www.blocknews.net
Date	2019-01-17 11:56 -0800

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Mahipal:
> > > didn't Bill buy DOS cheap, then licensed it to IBM.

1980, Seattle, Bill licensed "DOS" ( then vaporware ) to IBM;
to fulfill the contract, he purchased a CP/M clone from a CPU-board tester.

IBM offered customers MicroSoft's DOS or Kildall's CP/M;
CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-01-17 11:56 -0800
  Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-17 17:45 -0500
    First and foremost, Microsoft sells compilers. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-01-17 15:21 -0800
      Before 1980, the desktop market was very young, very small. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-01-18 10:03 -0800
        Re: Before 1980, the desktop market was very young, very small. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-18 18:40 -0500
          You're supposed to buy all new hardware/software. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-01-18 17:31 -0800
            Re: You're supposed to buy all new hardware/software. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-18 21:39 -0500
              Re: You're supposed to buy all new hardware/software. "Chris M. Thomasson" <ahh_f_it@crap.nothing> - 2019-01-18 19:48 -0800
          Re: Before 1980, the desktop market was very young, very small. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-18 23:08 -0700
      Re: First and foremost, Microsoft sells compilers. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2019-01-18 13:40 -0800
        Re: First and foremost, Microsoft sells compilers. Sergi o <invaliid@invalid.com> - 2019-01-18 16:18 -0600
          Re: First and foremost, Microsoft sells compilers. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2019-01-18 14:48 -0800
          Re: First and foremost, Microsoft sells compilers. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-01-19 07:05 -0500
            Re: First and foremost, Microsoft sells compilers. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2019-01-19 12:52 -0800
        Re: First and foremost, Microsoft sells compilers. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2019-01-18 15:22 -0800
    Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. Sergi o <invaliid@invalid.com> - 2019-01-17 20:56 -0600
      Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-18 08:48 -0500
        Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. Sergi o <invaliid@invalid.com> - 2019-01-18 10:42 -0600
        Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2019-01-18 23:14 +0100
          Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. PP <email2@lizards8912m.org> - 2019-01-18 22:53 +0000
            Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-18 18:46 -0500
              Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-18 23:09 -0700
    Re: CP/M cost 200$ more, so MicroSoft won the battle. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-01-18 03:52 +0000

csiph-web