[OT] BASIC Factoid (was Re: [Tutor] Functions !)

Glen Wheeler wheelege@tsn.cc
Wed, 29 Aug 2001 22:20:49 +1000

> On  0, alan.gauld@bt.com wrote:
> > > > They are similar.  I never did enough BASIC programming to
> > >
> > > There's actually a reason for that. All versions of BASIC on
> > > early PCs were written by, licensed from, and "maintained"
> > > by Microsoft. And you thought BASIC was public domain :P
> >
> > Gosh, I can't believe I'm aplogising for either MS or BASIC!
> >
> > However in the pre IBM PC days BASICs were split about 50/50
> > between MS BASIC - A triuly dire but very small ROM version(4K?)
> > and various proprietary ones. Commodore used Comodore BASIC
> > which was all their own.
> I'm not sure. The Commodore 128's startup screen looks like this:
>         (C)1977 MICROSOFT CORP.

  But what about the C64?  I don't have that great a memory but I don't
recall a microsoft tag on it's BASIC.  Of course I am probably wrong :)

> > Similarly the Sinclaiir(aka Timex)
> > ZX81 had its own version.  THE Texas Instruments PC of the
> > time (TI/99?) had a very sophisticated BASIC(16K/32K?)
> > Most of the Japanese home computers of the '80s used
> > the oldest MS version (mandatory line numbers and only
> > single character variable namess etc!).
> Many of them were MSX computers, which was neat because games were
> compatible between different brands (if I recall correctly). MSX BASIC was
> Microsoft's.
> Sinclair's may have been their own.
> Of course, I was a kid back then, so I can't really remember, have to use
> web searches :)
> BASIC was meant as an easy language for beginners, like Python is now. I
> can't really imagine why they believe it would be good for beginners.
> (see! referred to python!)

  Ha ha, yes yes the good old days...man you have me winding back the clock.
I was but a little 'un all the way back then too.  I still remember being
about 10 years old pumping in a hexadecimal Q-Bert game from a C64 mag :)
  Damn, wish I still had that thing.