On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, David Heremans wrote:
> Ofcourse comercial as they where/are they kept al the (MSX-)rights to
> them self and refusing to sell them, not willing that anybody else
> further developed their products.
If Microsoft was after a maximum amount of money, they would have sold the
MSX rights. MSX was not a threat to any other system (PC, Mac) Microsoft was
programming for.
> The hardware was expanded alright, floppys were becomming standard and a
> solution for more memory (up to 32 meg) was available and standarized,
There was never a 16-bit CPU, clock speed didn't improve (until the turbo R
was released) and the 64K address range of the Z80 was never increased
(paging, like the memory mapper, is not easy for the programmer).
> but to be backwards compatible one needed MSX-DOS1 for the old programs.
> And so we had the problem of good hardware/no way to make a
> (backwards-)compatible software solution to use the hardware.
If Microsoft could use the CP/M calling interface like it did with MSX-DOS,
I think ASCII could have implemented a compatible DOS without needing the
rights to MSX-DOS.
I don't like Microsoft either, but to blame them for the death of MSX would
be "re-writing history", in my opinion.
Bye,
Maarten
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put
in the body (not subject) "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the
quotes :-) Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] (www.stack.nl/~wiebe/mailinglist/)
****
