Re: your mail

[Jim Hartley <xjimh@worldnet.att.net>]

DOS 7.10? I guess that's one of those "M$-hidden-under-Windoze-DOS" 
versions? It gets confusing, since M$ used 7.x for those, while there is 
also an IBM PC-DOS 7.0 which is a "real" DOS and that's the one I always 
think of when DOS 7 is mentioned. That one is my favorite, I still have 
copies around, especially in the form of quick-boot utility diskettes. I 
guess one reason I like it is because I got it LEGALLY for free - a 
reward for participating in the Beta test. (Then again, those who know 
me know I will go to great lengths to avoid using ANY Micro$quish products.)

Jim Hartley

Lyvim Xaphir wrote:

>I agree with Jim Hartley.  This is pretty much a nonissue.  Dos isn't
>even supported by M$ any more as far as I know, and I've never heard of
>any case where M$ has gone after an individual for such a thing in the
>past anyway.  Their only concern are large scale pirates selling on the
>black market or corporations doing *current* release software on a
>significant basis.  They pretty much leave the individuals alone.
>
>And I don't think anyone will ever mistake this place as a site for
>swapping of illegal software.  This isn't anywhere near that class and
>to suggest that it might be is kind of edging over into the pinhead
>arena.
>
>On another note, if I was going to share a copy of Dos it would be
>version 7.10 because of it's superior memory management and stability. 
>7.10 was partially a response in 98 to gamer's claims of
>incompatibilities in winblows with some of the more sophisticated Dos
>games like Elder Scrolls Arena, Duke Nukem 3d and others.  It was the
>last best version of Dos.
>
>
>On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 10:53, Ged Haywood wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi there,
>>
>>On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Jim Hartley wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I think this one is WAY, WAY under the radar.
>>>      
>>>
>>I'd agree if this weren't a public mailing list.
>>
>>I'm more concerned with the reputation of the list.  If it earns a
>>reputation as a place for swapping pirate copies of software, that
>>might not be a Good Thing.
>>
>>There has to be a way for the guy to get what he wants done without
>>broadcasting a technical infringement of a copyright owned by a ten
>>billion dollar potential adversary.
>>
>>73,
>>Ged.
>>    
>>
>
>--LX
>
>  
>