4 ms·

> Microsoft didn't ban other office suite products from working on Windows. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code

• ryanwaggoner 17y ago
  Interesting, for two reasons: 1. It states that it was only in a beta release of Windows 3.1 and was removed for the final product. Is this really the basis of your argument here? 2. They clearly went about it in a deceptive way, but is what they were doing at the core wrong? Was Windows 3.1 considered an upgrade from MS-DOS? If so, I don't see how requiring users to have the base package is wrong, any more than Apple is unwilling to allow you to upgrade from Windows 95 to Snow Leopard. Maybe I'm not understanding the situation?
  • lallysingh 17y ago
    for (1) the purpose was (as rumors go) to scare off OEMs from DR DOS.
  • sriramk 17y ago
    Larry Osterman has a good post on the AARD code here http://blogs.msdn.com/larryosterman/archive/2004/08/12/213681.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/larryosterman/archive/2004/08/12/21368...
• tedunangst 17y ago
  That's the exact opposite of banning competing products from working on Windows. They banned Windows from working.