🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Jun22.223038.4257@weyrich.UUCP> orville@weyrich.UUCP (Orville R. Weyrich) writes:
>In article <1991Jun21.143836.16559@ukpoit.co.uk> alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) writes:
>>In article <FISCHER.91Jun19230614@abel.iesd.auc.dk> fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) writes:
>>>
>>[ON SCO dropping their spreadsheet]
>>>
>>>It is also very unfortunate. Given that SCO is (partly) owned by
>>>MicroSoft, they would potentially have some real muscle behind them if
>>>they choose to counter the claim.
>>>
>>
>>But it's in Microsoft's intrest for the claim to succeed. These look and
>>feel cases are good for the big boys and bad for the little guy. 
>>Microsoft aren't going to set a precedent which is going to be bad for
>>when they decide to sue DR for DR-DOS, or whoever they want to go for.
>
>I would love to see MS try that -- MS-DOS itself started out as a clone of
>DR's popular [at the time] CP/M operating system. But of course, DR can't
>complain too loudly itself, as CP/M is very reminiscent of DEC's RSX
>(and perhaps other earlier DEC operating systems).
>

Just as 123 is a clone of visicalc.......
-- 
  Alan Barclay
  iT                                |        E-mail : alan@ukpoit.uucp
  Barker Lane                       |        BANG-STYLE : .....!ukc!ukpoit!alan
  CHESTERFIELD S40 1DY              |        VOICE : +44 246 214241