Even those customers making heavy use of DR-DOS features not available in MS-DOS said they would accept not having those features because "MS-DOS would be less trouble".

"Trouble"? Yes. Every time my customers called tech support for some software package, support would actually ridicule them for using non-Microsoft products, and refuse support until this was corrected.


So... its the end user's fault, for not forgoing support for their other software?

This is a case where there's lots of 'right' and lots of 'wrong' - and there can be a lot of overlap.

From your endusers perspective, it *was* less trouble. If they had MS-DOS, then the other vendors couldn't say "thatsyourproblemcallusbackifitreoccursafteryougetridofitgoodbye".

From the third party perspective, it was less trouble to "only" test on MS-DOS and/or to think the problem was likely there.

Of course these software publishers are all dead now, killed by the Microsoft monopoly they did so much to create, because users didn't want the

Some of them. But lots are shaken out because that was during a "boom time". Dbase isn't dead due to Microsoft. :)

No, blaming the OEMs is just an attempt to shift the blame from where it belongs. Many OEMs tried alternatives, both operating systems and applications software bundles. The users spoke, and what the users said was "Microsoft and only Microsoft!".

What and when? Not since Win 95 shipped. How many offered OS/2?

No, the OEM's are partially to blame, but Microsoft had THEM in the vise by then - For a lot of reasons.

Users were one, but the preferential licensing was another - and that took off because OEMs were greedy.

Microsoft is perfectly within their rights to run enforcement audits and police raids

I have to disagree with the "police raids". Microsoft, if they feel a crime has been committed, should file charges as anybody else, not get some cops for the afternoon to go roust and intimidate.

Addison