DOCSLIB.ORG

In Re Exodus Communications, Inc. Securities Litigation 01-CV

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In Re Exodus Communications, Inc. Securities Litigation 01-CV 1 DAVID M. FURBUSH (SBN 83447; [email protected]) DHAIVAT H. SHAH (SBN 196382; [email protected]) 2 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 2765 Sand Hill Road 3 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Telephone: (650) 473-2600 4 Facsimile: (650) 473-2601 5 Attorneys for Defendants Ellen M. Hancock, R. Marshall Case, Dick Stoltz, 6 Herbert A. Dollahite, Adam W. Wegner, Beverly Brown, Sam S. Mohamad, and William Yeack 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 In re Master File No. C-01-2661-MMC 12 EXODUS COMMUNICATIONS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION 13 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ 14 This Document Relates To: MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION 15 ALL ACTIONS Hon. Maxine M. Chesney 16 Hearing Date: Not Set 17 18 19 20 21 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201, defendants Ellen M. Hancock, R. Marshall 22 Case, Dick Stoltz, Herbert A. Dollahite, Adam Wegner, Sam S. Mohamed, William Yeack, and 23 Beverly Brown respectfully request that this court take judicial notice of each of the following 24 documents, true and correct copies of which are attached as Exhibits A through C hereto: 25 A. In re Stac Electronics Securities Litigation, Second Amended Consolidated Class 26 Action Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws, Master File No. 92-1120- 27 R(BTM), filed November 18, 1993. A true and correct copy of that complaint is hereto attached 28 as Exhibit A. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE MASTER FILE NO. C-01-2661-MMC 1 B. In re Daou Systems, Inc. Securities Litigation, Third Amended Class Action 2 Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws, Master File No. 98cv1537-L(CGA), 3 filed May 16, 2002. A true and correct copy of that complaint is hereto attached as Exhibit B. 4 C. In re Portal Software, Inc. Securities Litigation, Master File No. C-03-5138-VRW, 5 Consolidated Third Amended Complaint, filed May 19, 2005. A true and correct copy of that 6 complaint is hereto attached as Exhibit C. 7 These complaints are proper subjects for judicial notice because they have been duly filed 8 in the Ninth Circuit and in the United States District Court of the Northern District of California, 9 and they are part of the court record in those proceedings. See Grimes v. Pinn Bros. Constr. Co., 10 No. C-01-2787 EDL, 2002 WL 356521, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2002) (“It is proper for a court 11 to take judicial notice of the contents in court files in other lawsuits.”) (citing Mullis v. U.S. Bank, 12 Ct., 828 F.2d 1385, 1388 n.9 (9th Cir. 1987)). 13 Respectfully submitted, 14 DAVID M. FURBUSH DHAIVAT H. SHAH 15 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 16 17 Dated: October 12, 2005 By: /s/ David M. Furbush David M. Furbush 18 Attorneys for Individual Defendants 19 Ellen M. Hancock, R. Marshall Case, Dick Stoltz, Herbert A. Dollahite, Adam W. Wegner, Beverly 20 Brown, Sam S. Mohamad, and William Yeack 21 MP1:969048.1 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE MASTER FILE NO. C-01-2661-MMC EXHIBIT A 1 WILLIAM S . LERACH (68581) LEONARD B . SIMON (58310) 2 THEODORE J . PINTAR (131372) MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD 3 HYNES & LERAC H 600 West Broadway, .Suite 1800_' 4 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone : 619/231-1058 d 5 JOSEPH H . WEIS S KEVIN J . YOURMAN (1W7159) 6 DAVID C . KATZ LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH H . LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH H . WEIS S 7 WEISS 1800 Avenue of the Stars 319 Fifth Avenue Suite 100 0 8 New York, NY 10016 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone : 212/532-417 1 Telephone : 310/277-157 4 9 - and - 10 Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNI A 13 TIMOTHY J . ANDERSON, NEIL SINGER ) Master File No . and ARTHUR SINGER, on Behalf of ) 92-1120-R(BTM) 14 Themselves and All Others Similarly ) Situated, ) CLASS ACTIO N 15 Plaintiffs , 16 vs . 17 GARY W . CLOW, DOUGLAS L . WHITING, ROBERT W . JOHNSON ; . ARTHUR J . 18 COLLMEYER, JOHN R . WITZEL, ROBERT A . HOFF, CROSSPOINT VENTURE 19 PARTNERS, LAWRENCE G . FINCH, SIGMA MANAGEMENT, SIGMA MANAGEMENT II, 20 L .P ., SIGMA PARTNERS, RUSSELL J . SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED ROBELEN, IDANTA PARTNERS, STAC CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR 21 ELECTRONICS, ALEX . BROWN & SONS, VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL INC . and MONTGOMERY SECURITIES , SECURITIES LAW S 22 Defendants . 23 24 In re STAC ELECTRONICS SECURITIES 25 LITIGATION 2 6 Plaintiffs Demand A This Document Relates To : Trial By Jury 27 ALL ACTIONS . 21 I Plaintiffs, by their undersigned attorneys, for their 2 Complaint against defendants, allege upon information and belief 3 except ¶1[20-21 which are alleged upon personal knowledge, as 4 follows : 5 NATURE OF THE ACTION 6 1 . This is a class action on behalf of all purchasers of the 7 stock of Stac Electronics ('"Stac" or the "Company") between May 7, 8 1992 and July 20, 1992 . Stac manufactures data compression 9 products that increase the effective capacity of storage device s 10 and are used by . owners of personal computers that use Microsoft 11 Corporation's MS-DOS or comparable operating systems . Stac's 12 "Stacker" software products provide an increase in the data storage 13 capacity of personal computers for much less cost than purchasing 14 additional "hard disk" storage capacity . By 1990, millions of 15 personal computers using the MS-DOS or comparable operating systems 16 existed and appeared to provide a large potential market for Stac's 17 Stacker products . Because Stac was first to market with a data 18 compression software product, during 1991, sales of Stac's Stacker 19 products exploded as users of personal computers found those 20 products an inexpensive and effective way to increase the data 21 storage capacity of the MS-DOS operating systems of their 22 computers . This allowed Stac to achieve significant growth in its 23 net income, as well as earnings per share through December 31, 24 1991 . 25 2 . By late 1991, 90% of Stac's revenues and over 90% of its 26 profits came from the sale of its Stacker 2 .0 data compression 27 product . Because the then currently available versions of 28 Microsoft's MS-DOS operating system did not have data compression - 1 - 1 capability, the sale of Stacker 2 .0 to owners of personal computers 2 using the MS-DOS operating system and purchasers of new computers 3 which came with the MS-DOS operating systems was the main market 4 for Stac's Stacker 2 .0 product . However, Stac's business would-be 5 severely injured if Microsoft included data compression capability 6 in its MS-DOS operating system (which Microsoft periodically 7 updated), as computer owners using the MS-DOS, system could then 8 obtain data compression capability at no extra cost by obtaining 9 the upgraded MS-DOS operating system and purchasers of, new persona l 10 computers supplied with the MS-DOS operating system would obtain 11 that capability with the purchase of their computer and have no 12 need to purchase separate software providing such capability . 13 3 . As a result of the niche Stac had found in the personal 14 computer software market, its revenue and net income exploded in 15 the latter part of calendar 1991 and early 1992 . However, Stac's 16 top executives knew by late 1991 that Stac's competitive position 17 was being impaired and that its strong growth in revenues and 18 earnings would shortly come to an end because of the increased -19 availability and popularity of competitive compression data 20 products and because (as they had learned) Microsoft intended to 21 include data compression capabilities in its next version of its 22 MS-DOS operating system, which it was then currently developing and 23 intended to release as soon as possible in 1992, and that this data 24 compression capability would be included at no additional cost in 25 Microsoft's upgraded MS-DOS system . This presented a terrible 26 threat to Stac and its insiders . Thus, they decided to undertake 27 a public offering of stock of the corporation, part of which was to 28 be sold by the corporation and part of which was to be sold by - 2 - 1 insider and controlling stockholders in an effort to raise capital 2 for the corporation to help it service the upcoming downturn in its 3 business and allow the insiders to cash out of their illiquid Stac 4 stock before these adverse facts became public knowledge, which 5 they knew would destroy the value of their stock before they were 6 able to complete a public offering . 7 4 . However, by late 1991 and continuing up to the date of 8 Stac's initial public offering on May 7, 1992 (the "Offering") , the 9 market and demand for Stac's products changed and Stac's insider s 10 and controlling shareholders realized that Stac's profitable growth 11 had peaked and that Stac would soon suffer declining revenues, net 12 income and earnings per share . By the date of the public offering, 13 Stac's insiders knew, but the public did not, that two very adverse 14 facts existed that were negatively affecting Stac's business . 15 First, demand for Stac's most important data compression product 16 (Stacker 2 .0) had weakened due to the introduction of a new popular 17 competitive product and due to customer resistance to purchasing 18 separate data compression software products'in anticipation of the 19 availability of upgraded personal computer operating systems that 20 included data compression capacity .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Illusion of Space and the Science of Data Compression And
    The Illusion of Space and the Science of Data Compression and Deduplication Bruce Yellin EMC Proven Professional Knowledge Sharing 2010 Bruce Yellin Advisory Technology Consultant EMC Corporation [email protected] Table of Contents What Was Old Is New Again ......................................................................................................... 4 The Business Benefits of Saving Space ....................................................................................... 6 Data Compression Strategies ....................................................................................................... 9 Data Compression Basics ....................................................................................................... 10 Compression Bakeoff .............................................................................................................. 13 Data Deduplication Strategies .................................................................................................... 16 Deduplication - Theory of Operation ....................................................................................... 16 File Level Deduplication - Single Instance Storage ................................................................. 21 Fixed-Block Deduplication ....................................................................................................... 23 Variable-Block Deduplication .................................................................................................. 24 Content-Aware Deduplication
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Windows for MS
    Month Year Version Major Changes or Remarks Microsoft buys non-exclusive rights to market Pattersons Quick & Dirty Operating System from December 1980 QDOS Seattle Computer Products (Developed as 86-DOS) (Which is a clone of Digital Researches C P/M in virtually every respect) Microsoft buys all rights to 86-DOS from Seattle Computer Products, and the name MS-DOS is July 1981 86-DOS adopted for Microsoft's purposes and IBM PC- DOS for shipment with IBM PCs (For Computers with the Intel 8086 Processor) Digital Research release CP/M 86 for the Intel Q3 1981 CP/M 86 8086 Processer Pre-Release PC-DOS produced for IBM Personal Mid 1981 PC-DOS 1.0 Computers (IBM PC) Supported 16K of RAM, ~ Single-sided 5.25" 160Kb Floppy Disk OEM PC-DOS for IBM Corporation. (First August 1982 PC-DOS 1.1 Release Version) OEM Version for Zenith Computer Corporation.. (Also known as Z-DOS) This added support for September 1982 MS-DOS 1.25 Double-Sided 5.25" 320Kb Floppy Disks. Previously the disk had to be turned over to use the other side Digital Research release CP/M Plus for the Q4 1982 CP/M Plus Intel 8086 Processer OEM Version For Zenith - This added support for IBM's 10 MB Hard Disk, Directories and Double- March 1983 MS-DOS 2.0 Density 5.25" Floppy Disks with capacities of 360 Kb OEM PC-DOS for IBM Corporation. - Released March 1983 PC-DOS 2.0 to support the IBM XT Microsoft first announces it intention to create a GUI (Graphical User Interface) for its existing MS-DOS Operating System.
    [Show full text]
  • “Killer” Acquisitions in the Digital Economy
    REMEMBER STACKER? ANOTHER LOOK AT “KILLER” ACQUISITIONS IN THE DIGITAL ECONOMY BY BENOIT D’UDEKEM, DIVYA MATHUR & MARC VAN AUDENRODE1 1 Vice President, Analysis Group, Brussels, Belgium, Vice President, Analysis Group, Chicago, United States, and Managing Principal, Analysis Group, Brussels, Belgium. CPI ANTITRUST CHRONICLE I. INTRODUCTION MAY 2020 In 1990, a small software corporation, Stac Electronics, released a drive compression software called Stacker that doubled PC hard drives’ volume. At that time, hard drives had limited capacity and were expensive. Unsur- “Killer Acquisitions,” Big Tech, and prisingly, the drive compression software was hugely successful. In 1993, Microsoft released version 6.0 of its flagship operating system, MS-DOS, Section 2: A Solution in Search of a which included its own compression software. This led to a long legal bat- Problem tle between Microsoft and Stac Electronics, at the end of which Microsoft By Kristen C. Limarzi & Harry R. S. Phillips had to remove its drive compression feature from MS-DOS and compen- sate Stac Electronics. “How Tech Rolls”: Potential Competition and “Reverse” Killer Acquisitions Today, perhaps Microsoft would simply buy Stac Electronics and By Cristina Caffarra, Gregory S. Crawford spare itself the legal headache. & Tommaso Valletti Would that be a bad outcome? Maybe not. Economists have long The No Kill Zone: The Other Side of debated the relationship between incumbency, market power and innova- Pharma Acquisitions tion, with no unambiguous answer to date. Incumbents and monopolists By Jacqueline Grise, David Burns may have less incentive to innovate2 (the so-called “replacement effect”), & Elizabeth Giordano but may also be better at innovating3 (the so-called “efficiency effect”).
    [Show full text]
  • III IIII US005532694A United States Patent (19) 11 Patent Number: 5,532,694 Mayers Et Al
    III IIII US005532694A United States Patent (19) 11 Patent Number: 5,532,694 Mayers et al. (45. Date of Patent: Jul. 2, 1996 (54) DATA COMPRESSION APPARATUS AND FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS METHOD USING MATCHING STRING SEARCHING AND HUFFMAN ENCODING 2625527 3/1978 Germany. 57-132242 8/1982 Japan. (75 Inventors: Clay Mayers, San Diego; Douglas L. OTHER PUBLICATIONS Whiting,Ing, Carlsbad, both oof Calif. Bar-Ness et al. "String Dictionary Structure for Markov (73) Assignee: Stac Electronics, Inc., San Diego, Arithmetic Encoding," IEEE International Conference on Calif. Communications, vol. 1, Jun. 1988, New York, pp.395-399. English translation of German Patent No. 26 25527, 1978. Berkovich, S. et al., "Matching String Patterns in Large 21 Appl. No.: 499,230 Textual Files,' Department of Electrical Engineering and 22 Filed: Jul. 7, 1995 Computer Science, George Washington Univ., pp. 122-127, 1985. Related U.S. Application Data Boyer, R., “A Fast String Searching Algorithm', Commu nications of the ACM 2010), 762–772, 1977. 63 Continuation of Ser. No. 927,343, Aug. 10, 1992, aban- Cleary, J., "Compact Hash Tables Using Bidirectional Lin doned, which is a continuation-in-part of Ser. No. 870,554, ear Probing'; IEEE Transactions on Computers c-33(9): Apr. 17, 1992, abandoned, which is a continuation of Ser. 828-834, 1984. No.division 619,291, of s"N, Nov. 27, 1990,5. Pat. A.No. 5,146,221,13, 6.E. which N.i Collmeyer, A. et al., “Analysis of Retrieval Performance for 5,016,009. Selected File Organization Techniques.” Proc. Fall Joint (51) Int. Cl.
    [Show full text]
  • Virus Bulletin, May 1993
    May 1993 ISSN 0956-9979 THE AUTHORITATIVE INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATION ON COMPUTER VIRUS PREVENTION, RECOGNITION AND REMOVAL Editor: Richard Ford Technical Editor: Fridrik Skulason Consulting Editor: Edward Wilding, Network Security Management, UK Advisory Board: Jim Bates, Bates Associates, UK, Andrew Busey, Datawatch Corporation, USA, David M. Chess, IBM Research, USA, Phil Crewe, Ziff-Davis, UK, David Ferbrache, Defence Research Agency, UK, Ray Glath, RG Software Inc., USA, Hans Gliss, Datenschutz Berater, West Germany, Igor Grebert, McAfee Associates, USA,Ross M. Greenberg, Software Concepts Design, USA, Dr. Harold Joseph Highland, Compulit Microcomputer Security Evaluation Laboratory, USA, Dr. Jan Hruska, Sophos, UK, Dr. Keith Jackson, Walsham Contracts, UK, Owen Keane, Barrister, UK, John Laws, Defence Research Agency, UK, Dr. Tony Pitt, Digital Equipment Corporation, UK, Yisrael Radai, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel, Martin Samociuk, Network Security Management, UK, John Sherwood, Sherwood Associates, UK, Prof. Eugene Spafford, Purdue University, USA, Dr. Peter Tippett, Certus Corporation, USA, Steve R. White, IBM Research, USA, Dr. Ken Wong, PA Consulting Group, UK, Ken van Wyk, CERT, USA. CONTENTS VIRUS ANALYSES 1. The Volga Virus Family 9 EDITORIAL 2. Pitch - A new Virus High Note 10 Better DOS than DOS? 2 3. Loren - Viral Nitroglycerine? 12 IN MEMORIAM FEATURE David Lindsay 3 The Other Virus War 14 VIRUS PREVALENCE TABLE 3 PRODUCT REVIEWS NEWS Popping Up 3 1. MS-DOS 6: Worth the Wait? 17 McAfee Makes a Deal? 4 2. VET - The Wizard of Oz 20 Dirty Macs 4 INDUSTRY WATCH IBM PC VIRUSES (UPDATE) 5 ICVC ’93 - Virus Hunting in Bulgaria 23 INSIGHT Bates: Blues and Roots 7 END NOTES & NEWS 24 VIRUS BULLETIN ©1993 Virus Bulletin Ltd, 21 The Quadrant, Abingdon Science Park, Oxon, OX14 3YS, England.
    [Show full text]
  • Jonathan Burt's Presentation on The
    EVOLUTION OF HOME SOFTWARE The history of software and how it has evolved and changed over the years for home (and business) users. Welcome • Who am I? • Jonathan A Burt BSc Cert Mgmt HND FIAP IEng MBCS CITP • Batchelor of Science Degree (Open) • Professional Certificate in Management • Higher National Diploma in Computing • Fellow of the Institute of Analysts and Programmers • Incorporated Engineer with the Engineering Council • Member of the British Computer Society • Charted IT Professional • PRINCE2 Practitioner • Certified Novell Administrator (v5.x) • 25+ years experience of working in IT. • Long time member of the Isle of Wight PC User Group! Software Evolution • Over the years software and operating systems have evolved quite drastically. • Gone are the days of the Command Line Interface (CLI), and it’s all Windows and Mouse! • I have tried to show how our use of computers have changed with regard to the evolution of software. • Apologies if I don’t cover your “favourite”! 8bit, 16bit, 32bit, 64bit • Modern PCs use the x86 architecture and as such have limitations on the physical memory range within which they can operate, for example 2x where ‘x’ is: • 8-bit = 256K • 16-bit = 65,536K (i.e. 64 KB) • 32-bit = 4,294,967,296K (i.e. 4 GB) • 64-bit = 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 (i.e. 16 Exabyte or 18,000,000 Terabytes!) Operating Systems - DOS • The dominant Disk Operating System when IBM created the IBM PC, was CP/M (Control Program/Monitor and later Control Program for Microcomputers) owned by Digital Research for the 8-bit Intel 8080 range of processors.
    [Show full text]
  • MISOSYS Products Get the Job Done!
    Look at what is in this issue: R'~q wr IBM PC Line Drawing, by Roy Soltoff ev AMORT1: Amortization Table, by Andrew M. Kunz ow Yet ANother HiRes Graphics Format, by Hans de Wolf Reusing NEC Laser Cartridges, by Roy Soltoff BACKUP Basics, by Scott Toenniessen ' New price list for TMQ subscribers, MISOSYS products get the job done! - TRIj . iI _ - ri Volume VlI.i $10 Winter92/93 PRICE LIST for TMQ Subscribers - effective Jan 1, 1993 TRS-80 Software (items on Closeout) TRS-80 Game Programs (items on Closeout) Product Nomenclature Mod Ill Mod 4 Price S&H AFM Auto File Manager data base P.50-310 n/a $10.00 D Cornsoft Group Game Disk: Bouncezoids, Crazy Painter, BackRest for hard drives P-12-244 P-12-244 $10.00 Frogger, Scarfman, Space Castle (M3) M-55-GCA $20.00 BASIC/S Compiler System P-20-010 n/a $10.00B Kim Watt's Hits (M3) P-55-GKW $9.95 BSORT / BSORT4 L-32-200 L-32-210 $5.00 Lair of the Dragon (M3/M4) M-55-021 $10.00 CP/M (MM) Hard Disk Drivers H-MM-??? $10.00 B Lance Miklus' Hits (M3) P-55-GLM $15.00 CON80Z I PRO-CON80Z. M-30-033 M-31-033 $5.00 Leo Cristopherson's (M3) P-55-GLC $10.00 diskDISK / LS-diskDISK L-35-211 L-35-212 $10.00 The Gobbling Box (M3/M4) M-55-020 $10.00 DoubleDuty M-02-231 $25.00 DSM51 / DSM4 L-35-204 L-35-205 $10.005 MSDOS Game Programs DSMBLR / PRO-DUCE M-30-053 M-31-053 $10.00 Lair of the Dragon M-86-021 $10.00 EDAS / PRO-CREATE M-20-082 M-21-082 $10.00 0 EnhComp / PRO-EnhCon,p Diskette M-20-072 M-21-072 $23.98 Filters: Combined I & II L-32-053 n/a $5.00 B GO:Maintenance n/a M-33-100 $15.00 B GO:System Enhancement
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States ______
    No. 15-1439 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States _________ CYAN, INC., ET AL. Petitioner, v. BEAVER COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT FUND, ET AL. Respondents. _________ On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal for the State of California, First Appellate District _________ BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE LAW PROFESSORS IN SUPORT OF PETITIONERS _________ John C. Dwyer Counsel of Record Jeffrey M. Kaban Matthew Ezer Cooley LLP 3175 Hanover Street Palo Alto, CA 94304 (650) 843-5000 Counsel for Amici Curiae Professors Elizabeth Cosenza, Allen Ferrell, Sean J. Griffith, Joseph A. Grundfest, M. Todd Henderson Michael Klausner, and Urska Velikonja i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page STATEMENT OF INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ..................................................................... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................... 4 ARGUMENT ............................................................. 6 I. CONGRESS ENACTED SLUSA TO CLOSE THE JURISDICTIONAL LOOPHOLE CREATED BY THE PSLRA AND ENSURE A UNIFORM INTERPRETATION OF BOTH THE SECURITIES ACT AND SLUSA .................. 6 A. The PSLRA Offered Defendants Protections Against Abusive Suits Filed In Federal Court, But Inadvertently Shifted Securities Actions to State Courts........................ 6 B. Congress Enacted SLUSA to close the Jurisdictional Loophole Created by the PSLRA ...................... 10 C. This Court’s Interpretation of SLUSA Should Be Informed by the Clear Congressional Purpose of Closing the Jurisdictional Loophole ............................................. 14 II.
    [Show full text]
  • The Desktop File System
    The Desktop File System Morgan Clark Stephen Rago Programmed Logic Corporation 200 Cottontail Lane Somerset, NJ 08873 Abstract 1.1 Goals This paper describes the structure and performance Our goals in designing the Desktop File System characteristics of a commercial file system designed (DTFS) were influenced by our impressions of what for use on desktop, laptop, and notebook computers the environment was like for small computer systems, running the UNIX operating system. Such systems such as desktop and laptop computers. The physical are characterized by their small disk drives dictated size of these systems limits the size of the power sup- by system size and power requirements. In addition, plies and hard disk drives that they can use at a rea- these systems are often used by people who have lit- sonable cost. Systems that are powered by batteries tle or no experience administering Unix systems. attempt to use small disks to minimize the power The Desktop File System attempts to improve overall drained by the disk, thus increasing the amount of system usability by transparently compressing files, time that the system can be used before requiring that increasing file system reliability, and simplifying the batteries be recharged. administrative interfaces. The Desktop File System It is common to find disk sizes in the range of has been in production use for over a year, and will 80 to 300 Megabytes in current 80x86-based laptop be included in future versions of the SCO Open and notebook systems. Documentation for current Desktop Unix system. Although originally intended versions of UnixWare recommend a minimum of 80 for a desktop environment, the file system is also MB of disk space for the personal edition, and 120 being used on many larger, server-style machines.
    [Show full text]
  • PC-DOS Notes Wendy Krieger – an Os2fan2
    PC-DOS Notes Wendy Krieger – an os2fan2 The scope of this document is from version 5.00 onwards and OS/2 2.0 onwards. The IBM releases of Windows are also covered. Files that derive from earlier versions, and continued to be used in these releases, are also documented. IBM moved from an OEM DOS to a retail DOS with DOS 5.0. This DOS is the most extensively updated version of DOS, and is the source of OS/2 DOS files. DOS 6 followed the availability of the microsoft code. 6.3 copies 6.2, while 7.0 is a rewrite of DOS. 7.1 is found in various appliance applications only, never went to retail. DOS 3 – OS/2 v1.x BASICA BASICA. and GWBASIC, is more to cater for needs from the 1980s, where these emulate the default OS on the 8-bit machines. The version numbers usually matched the DOS version, until it was stopped being developed. The last IBM compiled version is for PC-DOS 3.00. This is also the last version to include the sample files (except MORTGAGE.BAS). Microsoft provided the code for the later versions. 3.10 and 3.20 check for DOS versions, but 3.31 and 3.4 are defanged. To test for the source code, run this as soon as Basic loads. This will tell you which RND code is used. PRINT RND 0.1213501 Basic compiled by Microsoft 0.7151002 Basic compiled by IBM 0.7055475 QuickBasic and QBASIC. BASIC was dropped in the run of DOS 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit 6 Operating Systems (Dos, Windows, Unix and Linux)
    Software UNIT 6 OPERATING SYSTEMS (DOS, WINDOWS, UNIX AND LINUX) Structure 6.0 Objectives 6.1 Introduction 6.2 MS-DOS Environment 6.2.1 MS-DOS Memory Types 6.2.2 MS-DOS Version 6.2.3 Loading MS-DOS 6.2.4 MS-DOS Device Drivers 6.2.5 Config.sys File and its Use 6.2.6 Directory Structure of DOS 6.2.7 MKDIR Command (Make Directory) 6.2.8 Other MS-DOS Command 6.2.9 MS-DOS Batch Files 6.2.10 File and Hard Disk 6.3 MS-Windows 6.3.1 Advantage of Using Windows vs DOS 6.3.2 Versions of MS Windows 6.3.3 Basic Features of Windows 6.3.4 Support for MS-DOS 6.3.5 Dial up Network and Internet Explorer 6.3.6 The Internet Explorer Web Browser 6.3.7 Customizing Windows Operating Systems 6.3.8 Start Menu 6.3.9 Windows Help 6.3.10 Organisation of information 6.3.11 Using Window Explorer 6.3.12 Using Notepad 6.4 Unix 6.4.1 Main Features 6.4.2 Unix Operating System 6.4.3 Utilities File Management 6.4.4 Process Management 6.4.5 Starting and Shutting Down UNIX/ LINUX 6.4.6 UNIX Command Syntax 6.4.7 UNIX File System 6.4.8 Mountable File System 6.4.9 Shell Scripts 6.4.10 User Management 6.4.11 Other System Activity 6.5 Linux 6.5.1 Technical Features of Linux 6.5.2 Linux File System 6.5.3 Components of a Linux System 6.5.4 Linux Kernel and its Modules 6.5.5 Drawbacks of Using Linux 6.6 Summary 6.7 Answers to Self Check Exercises 6.8 Keywords 6.9 References and Further Reading 6.0 OBJECTIVES After reading this Unit, you will be able to: 106 l Understand the basic features of MS-DOS, Window, Unix and Linux operating Operating Systems systems; and (Dos, Windows, Unix and Linux) l Work with various components of each types.
    [Show full text]
  • 94.Macmonthly.Riseofbillgates.Pdf
    microsoft continued Last month, we learned that Leonardo da nounced that it was embarking on a $100 DOS 6.0 operating system, eliminating the admitted that Money was an embarrassment inci's "Codex" notebook had joined Intuit million marketing campaign to boost aware- need for customers to purchase Stac's prod- to the whole company. and Stac Electronics as the leitest jewel in the ness of its name. "The Microsoft brand name uct. No longer. The deal announced between crown of Bill Gates. Gates, of course, is the represents 'access'—access to ideas, informa- Many people believed that Stac's victory Microsoft and Intuit calls for Microsoft to richest man in the United States: the founder, tion, fun, tools and even other people," said over Microsoft was proof that patents will pro- spend $1.5 billion to purchase Intuit's stock. Chairman, and CEO of Microsoft, the Seattle- Steve Ballmer, executive vice president of sales tect smaller companies from larger ones, even As part of the deal, Microsoft will sell off its based company that is running the world's and support at Microsoft. "As personal com- ones as large as Microsoft. But, a few months Money product to another firm. The official personal computer industry. puters appear in more and more places, we later, the two companies settled their differ- reason for jettisoning Money is to avoid the Leonardo's seventy-two page Codex want people to recognize how software, and ences with an agreement that called for patent risk of being nabbed by the anti-trust division notebook predicted the invention of the sub- specifically Microsoft software, is making their cross-licensing and for Microsoft to purchase of the Justice Department for anti-competi- marine and the steam engine, contained ad- computers come to life." 15% of Stac's stock for $83 million.
    [Show full text]