Heres a very good Microsoft/SCO/IBM/Novell history about the Windows NT development from Unix/OS2/Netware/Linux 
Microsoft was the major Unix company at this time. In late 80th there were more computers running Microsoft XENIX than all OTHER VERSIONS OF UNIX COMBINED.
Quote:
From the timeline above its clear that work on Microsoft XENIX and DOS was largely in parallel and XENIX greatly influenced DOS design: for example Microsoft Press' "MS-DOS Encyclopedia" shows a reproduction of a late DOS 1.25 OEM brochure which mention such future enhancements to DOS 1.25 as XENIX-compatible pipes, process forks, and multitasking, as well as "graphics and cursor positioning". That shows that Microsoft certainly tried to bring those two OSes closer, but the forks, multitasking, and multi-user support never materialized. Oddly,
Quote:
The second important fact that is often overlooked by naive or crooked Linux zealots is that Microsoft was essentially a software company that controls the PC hardware standard. Without Microsoft investments in PC standard there can be no any substantial base for Linux at all.
In this sense Linux is a side effect of Microsoftdominance and no number of Linus Torvalds interviews can change the fact that he just replicated Microsoft's abandoned Xenix effort. Paradoxically with less innovation and quality: Linux kernel was always about premature optimization not about new architectural features of driving the Unix capabilities envelope.
XENIX -- Microsoft Short-lived L
Microsoft was the major Unix company at this time. In late 80th there were more computers running Microsoft XENIX than all OTHER VERSIONS OF UNIX COMBINED.
Quote:
From the timeline above its clear that work on Microsoft XENIX and DOS was largely in parallel and XENIX greatly influenced DOS design: for example Microsoft Press' "MS-DOS Encyclopedia" shows a reproduction of a late DOS 1.25 OEM brochure which mention such future enhancements to DOS 1.25 as XENIX-compatible pipes, process forks, and multitasking, as well as "graphics and cursor positioning". That shows that Microsoft certainly tried to bring those two OSes closer, but the forks, multitasking, and multi-user support never materialized. Oddly,
Quote:
The second important fact that is often overlooked by naive or crooked Linux zealots is that Microsoft was essentially a software company that controls the PC hardware standard. Without Microsoft investments in PC standard there can be no any substantial base for Linux at all.
In this sense Linux is a side effect of Microsoftdominance and no number of Linus Torvalds interviews can change the fact that he just replicated Microsoft's abandoned Xenix effort. Paradoxically with less innovation and quality: Linux kernel was always about premature optimization not about new architectural features of driving the Unix capabilities envelope.
XENIX -- Microsoft Short-lived L