"CP/M compatible" vs. "MS-DOS Compatible" machines?
ajp166 at bellatlantic.net
Tue Feb 5 06:01:02 CST 2008
>Subject: Re: "CP/M compatible" vs. "MS-DOS Compatible" machines?
> From: "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason at verizon.net>
> Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 02:00:47 -0500
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>On Sunday 03 February 2008 07:34, Allison wrote:
>> >On Thursday 31 January 2008 10:07, Allison wrote:
>> >> Whats more interesting is there was nothing to prevent a termcap file
>> >> and later improved CP/M work alikes did exactly that and many more
>> >> things.
>> >What sort of stuff would you put into the category of "CP/M work alikes"?
>> NOvados, DOS+, ZRdos, Zsdos and ZCPR addons to CP/M. They all could run
>> CP/M programs but added things missing from basic V2.2. The gotacha was
>> they required z80 as they were stuffing all that into the same space
>> required by V2.2.
>Not much of a gotcha, I don't think I'll be doing much with the 8080 these
>days anyhow, and pretty much every single one of the CP/M boxes I have on
>hand here are all equipped with a Z80.
>ZCPR I've run across, those others are not familiar to me. Are they out
>there and available? Might be worth a look at them if so.
Try google and expect a lot of results. They have been out there for
More information about the cctalk