IBM ROM BASIC or lack thereof

From: Russ Blakeman <rhblakeman_at_kih.net>
Date: Mon Oct 1 16:16:53 2001

Not sure but GW would usually run programs made for BASICA without any
problems that I ever saw. Of course there's a certain amount of a standard
to the BASIC language itself that leads to that for most things.

-> -----Original Message-----
-> From: owner-classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org
-> [mailto:owner-classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of Derek Peschel
-> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 3:11 PM
-> To: classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org
-> Subject: Re: IBM ROM BASIC or lack thereof
->
->
-> On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 11:24:40AM -0700, Sellam Ismail wrote:
-> > On Sun, 30 Sep 2001, Russ Blakeman wrote:
->
-> > > If memory serves the one real thing that cloners couldn't
-> duplicate, maybe
-> > > due to copyright, was the ROM BASIC but that they'd
-> duplicated everything
-> > > else including the BIOS or a very good part of it. That
-> pretty much led to
-> > > IBM losing a lot in the PC market.
-> >
-> > It should be pointed out that MS owned the copyright to BASIC, which is
-> > probably why it wasn't included on clones. They would have
-> had to obtain
-> > a license from MS.
->
-> So does that mean that BASICA (ROM + disk additions) and GWBASIC
-> (disk only)
-> shared features or even code?
->
-> -- Derek
->
Received on Mon Oct 01 2001 - 16:16:53 BST