Re: "There was no reason for a MS-DOS v1, since there was no other
computers (besides the IBM-PC) that it would run on"

Not correct; MS-DOS was running on the S-100 hardware sold by SCP
(Seattle Computer Products; the authors of 86-DOS). They sold hardware
(computers and boards) as well as the OS. Orderable versions also ran
on other systems; there was a version for a complete CompuPro (Godbout)
system, and for generally almost any S-100 system with an 8086 (or 8088)
CPU and either a Tarbell or a Cromemco disk controller.

Also, I still have a retail boxed copy of MS-DOS 3.30 right here. So
the statement that there was no such creature is incorrect (if anyone
wants a photo of the box, contact me by E-Mail).

Both PC-DOS and MS-DOS included Basic, but they were different Basics.
The PC-DOS basic made calls to the Basic in ROM of the IBM-PC, and thus
would not run on non-IBM hardware.

86-DOS is the preferred name for what you call Q-DOS; it is the name on
the diskettes and all of the documentation. Q-DOS (or is it QDOS?) was
only used internally during development. It had been abandoned even by
version 0.33, and possibly by version 0.10 or earlier.

BillW50 wrote:
> In news:h28bva$fcj$2@news.motzarella.org,
> Barry Watzman typed on Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:14:49 -0400:
>> Yes there was an MS-DOS 1.0; I have it, because I bought [NOT "Q-DOS"
>> but rather] "86-DOS" from SCP and I was sent MS-DOS 1.0 as an update
>> (on 8-inch diskettes !!] And, anyway, MS-DOS and PC-DOS are the same
>> thing except for the basic interpreter that was included (PC-DOS'
>> basic required the IBM-PC's basic-in-ROM).
>
> For starters, the first IBM-PC came with PC-DOS and not MS-DOS. As IBM
> bought the rights to it for $80,000 and they could make and sell as many
> copies as they wanted. They was no reason for a MS-DOS v1, since there
> was no other computers that it would run on, besides the ones that came
> with PC-DOS and you already have that.
>
> Yes Tim Patterson did work for SCP when he created QDOS. Which Bill
> Gates bought from SCP for $50,000. And later Microsoft hired Tim himself.
>
> And no, the version numbers were different between PC-DOS and MS-DOS.
> They did this on purpose so you wouldn't get the two confused. For
> example, any DOS version (meaning MS-DOS or PC-DOS) v3.30 was just
> PC-DOS and no MS-DOS version by that name.
>
> Yes the early PC-DOS did not include Basic, while MS-DOS did and it was
> called GWBasic. That reason was the real IBM-PC had Basic in ROM built
> into the computer. As the BIOS tried to boot up from floppy first and if
> that failed, booted Basic from ROM. MS-DOS didn't have this feature. But
> it still had Basic on boot floppy.
>
> I never heard of 86-DOS.
>
>> There were versions much earlier than you used.
>
> You mean earlier than I remember. Which is a big difference. As I
> remember the first IBM-PC and it was a dog. It came with PC-DOS and not
> MS-DOS. And it had no idea what a folder (aka subdirectory) was.
>