4 ms·
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix But Xenix does not run DOS or Windows programs like OS/2 does. Microsoft needed the bac
by cable2600 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix
But Xenix does not run DOS or Windows programs like OS/2 does. Microsoft needed the backwards compatibility to be able to sell the next DOS. When Microsoft split from IBM for OS/2 Microsoft's OS/2 NT 3.0 became Microsoft Windows NT 3.1
- oso2k 6y agoThere was also that XEDOS, that never officially saw the light of day. But some of those feature apparently made it into MS-DOS 2.x and appear as those *nix-like features that DOS had from 2.0+. https://youtu.be/Vo8NG8T4rWs https://youtu.be/Vo8NG8T4rWs
- skissane 6y ago> There was also that XEDOS, that never officially saw the light of day I wonder if XEDOS ever existed as actual code, as opposed to simply an item in a roadmap.
- rbanffy 6y agoWhen Microsoft first released Xenix, DOS wasn't a thing and GUIs were only available in rich research labs. Not being compatible with PC-DOS was not really an issue. As the IBM PC became Microsoft's passport to success, they ditched the Unixness of Xenix and embraced the CP/M-ness of PC-DOS. That's why people do dir in Windows instead of ls.