> The same thing goes for what's behind the GUIs. Microsoft has spent its
> entire existence trying to copycat ("embrace and extend") good, solid
> systems, and it has always come up with bastardized, buggy, incompatible
> versions. Examples:
>
> o DOS (bastardized CP/M)
And CP/M bastardized unix. DOS 2.0 actually added back in unix style
file handles. And of course hierarchical directories. DOS 1.0 and thus
apparently CP/M had a really whacky way of handling file IO... (Couldn't
open more than one file at a time or something, IIRC...)
> o Windows NT (bastardized Unix, somewhere back there)
I heard someone say it was VMS but I think they were on crack.
Anyway: Derivative, not Innovative. Yes, I can see how easy it is for MS
to get its 'ives confused.