Domesdos

30 years old, how time flies, personally I always preferred CP/M.

Started off on 6800 ASM on a Motorola Exormacs system with a Texas Instruments VDU with dual tape system.
Next I used CP/M based AMD Z80 based 2900 bit-slice development system, used for writing micro-code for the development of a MIL-STD-1750 military computer, this included writing lots of MIL-STD-1750 ASM.
Next I bought a ZX81 which was the beginning of a complete change to my life. I developed and we sold a hi-res graphics pack for it, while my boss wrote a game which we got into W H Smiths and sold lots of copies.
Next it was on to the ZX Spectrum which was when our computer games company really took off.

For development we used a dual 8088 / Z80 CP/M PC development system running and using a MASM assembler for the Z80 code and Wordstar as our editor. I developed a serial port and debugger hardware that plugged into the back of the Spectrum, so we could download from the PC to the Spectrum and interrupt and debug the code, setting breakpoints, single stepping etc. Later we used IBM PC clones with a Z80 board.
Next it was onto 68000 ASM on the Atari ST and finally on to the PC although I always avoided 8086 ASM as it's architecture and instruction set were a complete abortion after using MIL-STD-1750 and 68000 ASM. So I have only used C and some C++ on this.
These days I do web development using PHP, Javascript, HTML and CSS using Linux servers.
IMHO Microsoft has not yet produced a 'fit for purpose' OS, with Windows NT probably being the closest. Linux / Unix is the only proper mass market OS, which of course what the Mac is based on.
It is ironic that IBM designed the PC as a dead end product, to show the world that they should really be using proper computers ie IBM main frames. We are still suffering from the legacy of this including a slow, memory intensive, disfunctional OS.
Why do the American always buy and make mass market the VHS version of something instead of the Betamax?
