From: "Randy" 

If the System Printers emulated an IBM standard priner--no diff.

"Geo"  wrote in message news:42155e31{at}w3.nls.net...
> maybe for additional printers but not for the system printer.
>
> Geo.
>
> "Randy H"  wrote in message
> news:42153912$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> There were plenty of aftermarket printer manufacturers that worked with
> IBM
>> boxen at the time...
>> Documation and the Honeywell PPS come to mind....
>>
>> "Geo"  wrote in message
news:42147d79$2{at}w3.nls.net...
>> > Like requiring IBM printers if you wanted to print something?
>> >
>> > Geo.
>> >
>> > "Tony Ingenoso"  wrote
in message
>> > news:42142be6{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >> Even then IBM did technically reasonable things...
>> >>
>> >> "Randy"  wrote in message
news:4212c020$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >> > How muich of MS's behavior today is reminiscent of
IBM's back in the
>> >> > 80s
>> >> and
>> >> > ealy 90s under Akers?
>> >> >
>> >> > "Tony Ingenoso"
 wrote in message
>> >> > news:42116f22{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >> > >
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/SiliconInsider/story?id=88655&page=1
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Interesting.  There's more than a slight whiff
of decomposition
> IMO.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5