Bryant University standardizes on Linux 13393
Not a lie at all, clark! However, your characterization of DRDOS having such a strong sales momentum has to be a sheer fantasy occurring to you in either a dream or a conscious effort to jazz up your post.
Q: In or about June 1995, Mr. Gates, did you become involved in the planning for some meetings with Netscape? A: No. .. Do you understand the reference...
How did the news ever leak out to kill DR-DOS anyway, since there was such a tightly enforced NDA in effect for all the beta testers and no one else ever saw the message and even then only those who were in violation of the test conditions in the first place?
Email from Brad Silverberg: "oem's and corporations that are thinking about standardizing on dr-dos now have reasons to worry about their decision. they know...
It would seem to me that anyone cheating on the test conditions and using DR-DOS in lieu of MS-DOS would already be in the DR-DOS camp and hardly so ephemeral as to abandon them with such a weak premise. After all, Windows did work with DR-DOS and the release version demonstrated that.
Microsoft made no effort to disparage DR-DOS as a platform for Windows and DR-DOS died its own rest due to DRI and then Novell not making investments in GUI software commensurate with the investments made by MS in Windows. The market moved on, to integrated GUIs such as Windows95 and OS-2 and command line dinosaurs like DR-DOS and the others eventually faded into oblivion.
It is characteristic of the COLA folk to blame MS for not providing a strong welcome to any compebreastor who wanted or needed to ride the coat tails of Windows to some success, but that is a lame position and there is no benefit in encouraging such parasitic behavior.
Bryant University standardizes on Linux 13394
Linux Advocacy from Newsgroups