From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net   
      
   In article <87tt83besr.fsf@example.com>,   
   Salvador Mirzo   wrote:   
   >Grant Taylor  writes:   
   >   
   >> On 7/18/24 10:07, Paul Edwards wrote:   
   >>> For 35+ years I have wondered why there was no MSDOS for the mainframe.   
   >>   
   >> The answer is in the name.   
   >>   
   >> MS-DOS   
   >>   
   >> Microsoft DOS   
   >>   
   >> Micro   
   >>   
   >> micro-computers are the smallest end of the system with mainframes and   
   >> supers at the other end of the system.   
   >>   
   >> IBM provided a Disk Operating System for early and / or smaller   
   >> mainframes.   
   >   
   >And why is /Disk/ Operating System?  What's so /disky/ about it?   
      
   Simple: it drove a system with a disk.  Most early mainframes   
   didn't have disks, so once they came along, system software had   
   to evolve to meet the needs of new hardware.   
      
   IBM's DOS/360 was pretty anemic compared to it's flagship OS360.   
   But it was built as something of a stopgap because OS was behind   
   schedule.   
      
   	- Dan C.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)