FUD a form of dumbing down the population
GeoH
frenzy of new activity. Cottage industries showed up, there was much
software development, many books and publications showed up, hacks and
cracks for software, hardware, how to's, and etc.
BASIC was then the entry level language, which a person could in their
spare time with the home computer learn the basics of programming. Even
thought not all the BASIC's were powerful, the 8-bit CPU instruction set
was simple enough that one could learn how to create subroutines
embedded in BASIC comment statements, which through the EXEC command
could execute.
Many though not all of the BASIC's were written by Microsoft.
Of course, Micrsosoft's MS-DOS showed up on the scene, inexpensive IBM
compatible hardware showed up also, which popularised the MS OS based
machines, wiping out the competing home computers. There was still
BASIC-A for those with true IBM's that were expensive. Rest depended
upon the generic Microsoft GW-BASIC. MS-DOS came with some rudimentary
debugging and memory examination tools, to help with software
development for the neophyte home user.
Overall, the population had the tools and means to learn about computers
because of the ready access to the hardware along with supporting BASIC
software and helps.
Then anticompetitive measures set in, killing DR-DOS.
BASIC was still available in early 16-bit Windows 3.x. Then newer
versions of Microsoft OS's showed in the mid 1990's, which then began
the phasing out of these BASIC tools and helps, initiating the dumbing
down of the population.
Emphasis was pushed toward professional writing of games with higher
resolutions of graphics, taking the technology beyond the elemental
learning of the average Joe. The graphics became breath taking. What
in the past ran on expensive Unix minicomputers with special graphics
server hardware linked to the mini's buss systems now became available
on the PC.
Now one could spend hours with game play, without consideration of time
because of the realism provided in gaming. Forget education.
About the same time, Linux developed to the point where it was a serious
competitor to Windows 9x. Upstarts like Loki Games showed that Linux
was very capable of gaming quality rivalling Microsoft. It did not
crash like Windows did, Ethernet and serial I/O performance was
superior. Linux also came with free software language and tools. It
became a threat to civilisation, because it did not fit the dumbing down
equation.
So where am I leading (besides running out of time to continue writing)?
Any time there has been a movement afoot through the industry, to bring
tools and capability to the average citizen to improve their learning of
the technology at their level of comprehension, along comes a measure to
remove such equipment and tools.
I am seeing this now with the Linux lite low cost netbooks, which
although having a start, were competitively killed by underselling and
underhanded deeds toward OEM's and traditional retail channels.
--
GeoH
Hadron
> When home computers started showing up in the market place, there was a
> frenzy of new activity. Cottage industries showed up, there was much
> software development, many books and publications showed up, hacks and
> cracks for software, hardware, how to's, and etc.
>
> BASIC was then the entry level language, which a person could in their
> spare time with the home computer learn the basics of programming. Even
> thought not all the BASIC's were powerful, the 8-bit CPU instruction set
> was simple enough that one could learn how to create subroutines
> embedded in BASIC comment statements, which through the EXEC command
> could execute.
>
> Many though not all of the BASIC's were written by Microsoft.
Sorry? Most home computer Basic's were nothing to do with Microsoft.
This already sounds like another kno wnothing ant MS crusade in the
making. Let see...
>
> Of course, Micrsosoft's MS-DOS showed up on the scene, inexpensive IBM
Aha! Here we go ...
> compatible hardware showed up also, which popularised the MS OS based
> machines, wiping out the competing home computers. There was still
> BASIC-A for those with true IBM's that were expensive. Rest depended
Tsk! Anti freetard IBM eh!
> upon the generic Microsoft GW-BASIC. MS-DOS came with some rudimentary
> debugging and memory examination tools, to help with software
> development for the neophyte home user.
MS-DOS was, err, a DOS. NOT a programming IDE.
>
> Overall, the population had the tools and means to learn about computers
> because of the ready access to the hardware along with supporting BASIC
> software and helps.
>
> Then anticompetitive measures set in, killing DR-DOS.
I knew it.....
>
> BASIC was still available in early 16-bit Windows 3.x. Then newer
> versions of Microsoft OS's showed in the mid 1990's, which then began
> the phasing out of these BASIC tools and helps, initiating the dumbing
> down of the population.
What the fuck are you talking about? Languages such as Pascal and C came
to the front. Companies with innovative new approaches such as Borland
won awards left right and center.
But don't let your ignorance get in the way of another Porteresque
monologue.
You're not Jed are you? You sound clueless enough.
> Emphasis was pushed toward professional writing of games with higher
> resolutions of graphics, taking the technology beyond the elemental
> learning of the average Joe. The graphics became breath taking. What
You mean progress? The better the game the more it sold. Witness
Wolfenstein 3d v Command Keen for example. We won't even mention the
appearance of Doom ...
The average Joe couldn't service his BWM engine either. Should that
stop them improving it?
> in the past ran on expensive Unix minicomputers with special graphics
> server hardware linked to the mini's buss systems now became available
> on the PC.
>
> Now one could spend hours with game play, without consideration of time
> because of the realism provided in gaming. Forget education.
Or reality. There was also oodles of good educational SW coming out too
which took advantage of advances in HW and SW progress.
>
> About the same time, Linux developed to the point where it was a serious
> competitor to Windows 9x. Upstarts like Loki Games showed that Linux
Bullshit.
> was very capable of gaming quality rivalling Microsoft. It did not
No they didn't. What they showed was that they could PORT Windows games
to Linux only for the Freetard "Community" not to buy anything and so
they went bust.
> crash like Windows did, Ethernet and serial I/O performance was
> superior. Linux also came with free software language and tools. It
So does Windows : download away.
> became a threat to civilisation, because it did not fit the dumbing down
> equation.
You're an idiot. A real, raving nutcase.
>
> So where am I leading (besides running out of time to continue
> writing)?
To the loony bin?
>
> Any time there has been a movement afoot through the industry, to bring
> tools and capability to the average citizen to improve their learning of
> the technology at their level of comprehension, along comes a measure to
> remove such equipment and tools.
And yet we have never had better or less expensive tools should we need
them. On Linux and Windows.
Basically everything you have said is a crock of shit.
>
> I am seeing this now with the Linux lite low cost netbooks, which
> although having a start, were competitively killed by underselling and
> underhanded deeds toward OEM's and traditional retail channels.
What I am seeing is a paranoid fruit loop who needs locking up.
Peter Köhlmann
> GeoH <ge...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> When home computers started showing up in the market place, there was a
>> frenzy of new activity. Cottage industries showed up, there was much
>> software development, many books and publications showed up, hacks and
>> cracks for software, hardware, how to's, and etc.
>>
>> BASIC was then the entry level language, which a person could in their
>> spare time with the home computer learn the basics of programming.
>> Even thought not all the BASIC's were powerful, the 8-bit CPU
>> instruction set was simple enough that one could learn how to create
>> subroutines embedded in BASIC comment statements, which through the
>> EXEC command could execute.
>>
>> Many though not all of the BASIC's were written by Microsoft.
>
> Sorry? Most home computer Basic's were nothing to do with Microsoft.
Wrong on all accounts.
The vast majority of those BASICs came from MS
> This already sounds like another kno wnothing ant MS crusade in the
> making. Let see...
Oh, our little paranoid MS-shill Hadron Snot Quark is sniffing some more
anti-MS talk? Can't have that, can we?
>>
>> Of course, Micrsosoft's MS-DOS showed up on the scene, inexpensive IBM
>
> Aha! Here we go ...
So even facts are now anti-MS propaganda for Hadron now
>> compatible hardware showed up also, which popularised the MS OS based
>> machines, wiping out the competing home computers. There was still
>> BASIC-A for those with true IBM's that were expensive. Rest depended
>
> Tsk! Anti freetard IBM eh!
>
>> upon the generic Microsoft GW-BASIC. MS-DOS came with some rudimentary
>> debugging and memory examination tools, to help with software
>> development for the neophyte home user.
>
> MS-DOS was, err, a DOS. NOT a programming IDE.
Your incredibly bad reading disability is showing up again
>>
>> Overall, the population had the tools and means to learn about
>> computers because of the ready access to the hardware along with
>> supporting BASIC software and helps.
>>
>> Then anticompetitive measures set in, killing DR-DOS.
>
> I knew it.....
Well, dispute the fact that MS did every dirty trick with them
< snip more Hadron lunatic bile >
--
Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
Let it get in YOUR way. The problem for your problem.
FoxyKnoxy
> When home computers started showing up in the market place, there was a
Another nym from albasani.net.
High Balls must be boring himself to death.
High Plains Thumper
> Hadron wrote:
>> GeoH writes:
>>
>>> When home computers started showing up in the market
>>> place, there was a frenzy of new activity. Cottage
>>> industries showed up, there was much software development,
>>> many books and publications showed up, hacks and cracks
>>> for software, hardware, how to's, and etc.
>>>
>>> BASIC was then the entry level language, which a person
>>> could in their spare time with the home computer learn the
>>> basics of programming. Even thought not all the BASIC's
>>> were powerful, the 8-bit CPU instruction set was simple
>>> enough that one could learn how to create subroutines
>>> embedded in BASIC comment statements, which through the
>>> EXEC command could execute.
>>>
>>> Many though not all of the BASIC's were written by
>>> Microsoft.
>>
>> Sorry? Most home computer Basic's were nothing to do with
>> Microsoft.
>
> Wrong on all accounts. The vast majority of those BASICs came
> from MS
Peter, you are correct and Hadron is woefully incorrect, as stated:
[quote]
After the initial success of Altair BASIC, Microsoft BASIC became
the basis for a lucrative software licensing business, being
ported to the majority of the numerous home and personal
computers of the 1970s and especially the 1980s, and extended
along the way. Contrary to the original Altair BASIC, most home
computer BASICs were resident in ROM, and thus were available on
the machines at power-on in the form of the characteristic
"READY."-prompt. Hence, Microsoft's and other variants of BASIC
constituted a significant and visible part of many home
computers' rudimentary operating systems.
[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_BASIC
Among those home or hobbyist computers with MS BASIC were:
# Altair BASIC (MITS Altair and other S-100 computers)
# Amiga BASIC (Commodore Amiga family)
# Applesoft BASIC (Apple II family)
# Atari Microsoft BASIC I and II (Atari 8-bit family)
# BASICA ("BASIC Advanced") (PC-DOS, on IBM PC)
# Color BASIC (TRS-80 Color Computer)
# Commodore BASIC (Commodore 8-bit family, incl C64)
# Extended Color BASIC (TRS-80 Color Computer and Dragon 32/64)
# IBM Cassette BASIC (Original IBM PC, built into ROM)
# Galaksija BASIC (Galaksija home computer)
# GW-BASIC (BASICA for MS-DOS, on PC compatibles)
# Microsoft Level III BASIC (Tandy/Radio-Shack TRS-80)
# MBASIC (CP/M, on 8080/85 and Z80 based computers)
# MS BASIC for Macintosh (Mac OS on Apple Macintosh)
# MSX BASIC (MSX standard home computers)
# N88-BASIC (NEC PC8801/9801)
# N82-BASIC (NEC PC8201/8201A)
# QuickBASIC (PC-DOS/MS-DOS on IBM PC and compatibles))
# TRS-80 Level II BASIC (Tandy/Radio-Shack TRS-80)
# HP2640 HP2647 Programmable Terminal with AGL graphics extensions
AFAIK, among the non-MS BASIC computers would be Sinclair,
TI-99/4, and possibly HP scientific microcomputers predating MS-DOS.
>> This already sounds like another kno wnothing ant MS crusade
>> in the making. Let see...
>
> Oh, our little paranoid MS-shill Hadron Snot Quark is sniffing
> some more anti-MS talk? Can't have that, can we?
>
>>> Of course, Micrsosoft's MS-DOS showed up on the scene,
>>> inexpensive IBM
>>
>> Aha! Here we go ...
>
> So even facts are now anti-MS propaganda for Hadron now
>
>>> compatible hardware showed up also, which popularised the
>>> MS OS based machines, wiping out the competing home
>>> computers. There was still BASIC-A for those with true
>>> IBM's that were expensive. Rest depended
>>
>> Tsk! Anti freetard IBM eh!
>>
>>> upon the generic Microsoft GW-BASIC. MS-DOS came with
>>> some rudimentary debugging and memory examination tools,
>>> to help with software development for the neophyte home
>>> user.
>>
>> MS-DOS was, err, a DOS. NOT a programming IDE.
>
> Your incredibly bad reading disability is showing up again
Hadron apparently never used MS-DOS's DEBUG, which was a useful
tool. Equivalent in CP/M was DDT (Dynamic Debugging Tool).
>>> Overall, the population had the tools and means to learn
>>> about computers because of the ready access to the
>>> hardware along with supporting BASIC software and helps.
>>>
>>> Then anticompetitive measures set in, killing DR-DOS.
>>
>> I knew it.....
>
> Well, dispute the fact that MS did every dirty trick with them
>
> < snip more Hadron lunatic bile >
Following is a summary account of what happened:
[quote]
Microsoft refused to support DR-DOS in Windows; in one beta
release of Windows, Microsoft included code that detected DR-DOS
and displayed a warning message. Other versions of Windows
deliberately crashed the system if DR-DOS was detected so as to
give the impression that DR-DOS was unstable. These activities
came to light when the discovery process of the subsequent
lawsuit uncovered emails from senior Microsoft executives that
showed this virus plant was part of a concerted program to drive
DRI out of the PC operating systems business. DRI's successor
Caldera Systems raised these disputes in a 1996 lawsuit, but the
case was settled without a trial. As a condition of the
settlement Microsoft paid Caldera $150 million and Caldera
destroyed all documents it had produced in connection with the
case. Although a costly settlement to Microsoft, this eliminated
the most damning evidence of Microsoft's anti-trust behaviours,
and allowed Microsoft to control and dominate this sector of the
marketplace without concerns about any further serious competitor.
[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Research
--
HPT