Not sure if anyone interested on computer history, but I am always surprised
finding how Microsoft started. I loved Applesoft Basic but never realised
that was a Microsoft development:
"Applesoft BASIC was a dialect of BASIC supplied on the Apple II computer,
superseding Integer BASIC. Applesoft BASIC was supplied by Microsoft and its
name is derived from the names of both Apple and Microsoft."
> Hi Guys,
>
> Not sure if anyone interested on computer history, but I am always
> surprised
> finding how Microsoft started. I loved Applesoft Basic but never realised
> that was a Microsoft development:
>
> "Applesoft BASIC was a dialect of BASIC supplied on the Apple II computer,
> superseding Integer BASIC. Applesoft BASIC was supplied by Microsoft and
> its
> name is derived from the names of both Apple and Microsoft."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applesoft_BASIC
>
> Tamas
Around that time or a little later, I licensed a 6800 Basic interpreter
(very similar to the 6502) from Microsoft (then a partnership - my license
was signed by William Gates, partner). I used this in a couple products.
One of those is the DRC190, documented at http://louise.hallikainen.org/BroadcastHistory/uploads/HfDrc190.pdf . My
contact at Microsoft was, as I recall, Paul Allen, who was working for a
school district in NM. I was originally going to get the source code on 9
track tape, but got it on 8 inch CP/M floppy instead.
The Wikipedia article discusses interesting features of the language
implementation. During program entry, line numbers were converted to 16
bit binary. This was followed by a byte representing the length of the
tokenized line. All key words were replaced by single byte tokens. Strings
and numeric literals remained in ASCII. The tokens were used to index into
a jump table to handle the interpretation of the key word on program
execution. As mentioned in the Wikipedia article, GOTO and GOSUB to a line
number resulted in a search for the line number. If the line number was
larger than the current line number, the the search would start at the
current line number. If the search was less than the current line number,
the search started at the top of the program. The 16 bit line number would
be evaluated. If it was not the target, the length byte that followed the
line number was added to the current address to get to the line number of
the next line. The system hopped through the code to find the desired line
number. When we wrote programs, we'd put all the subroutines at the top of
the code so they could be found quickly. Note also that the actual address
of the GOSUB was pushed on the stack so a line number search would not
have to be done for a RETURN. Instead, the address was pulled off the
stack.
Math interpretation was also quite interesting. It was a recursive method
where a function calling another function resulted in the inner function
being evaluated, then returning the result to the outer function. There
was no conversion to RPN, it was just interpreted as written.
Anyway, it was very interesting reading the source code an adapting it to
my requirements.
> Around that time or a little later, I licensed a 6800 Basic interpreter
> (very similar to the 6502) from Microsoft (then a partnership - my license
> was signed by William Gates, partner). I used this in a couple products.
>
Nice! Probably that worth something for the collectors?
The Wikipedia article discusses interesting features of the language
> implementation. During program entry, line numbers were converted to 16
> bit binary. This was followed by a byte representing the length of the
> tokenized line. All key words were replaced by single byte tokens. Strings
>
...
Yep, sometimes that's why I say .NET is no more than Applesoft Basic...
Tokenized language (MSIL), garbage collector (also was in Applesoft Basic),
so the main idea is the same :-)
and numeric literals remained in ASCII. The tokens were used to index into
> a jump table to handle the interpretation of the key word on program
> execution. As mentioned in the Wikipedia article, GOTO and GOSUB to a line
>
I wrote few things BTW that used assembly blocks, as you could know where
the Basic would store your binary data -- bit of hack but worked perfectly.
Then you could use the Basic's API from ROM to make things simpler :-)
I wish Apple was just as open nowadays.
Anyway, good old days :-)
Tamas Rudnai wrote:
>
>
> The Wikipedia article discusses interesting features of the language
>
>> implementation. During program entry, line numbers were converted to 16
>> bit binary. This was followed by a byte representing the length of the
>> tokenized line. All key words were replaced by single byte tokens. Strings
>>
>>
> ...
>
> Yep, sometimes that's why I say .NET is no more than Applesoft Basic...
> Tokenized language (MSIL), garbage collector (also was in Applesoft Basic),
> so the main idea is the same :-)
>
> and numeric literals remained in ASCII. The tokens were used to index into
And didn't Bill's friend port MS Basic from Dartmouth BASIC practically
over a weekend?
So BASIC and DOS based on SW written elsewhere.
Was MS Word & Excel for Mac (available before decent Windows versions
due to windows < 3.1) not really the 1st decent real in house SW?
Ironic MS's first decent own design product was for Mac?
(The MS C compliers in 1986 I remember poor).
Visio = Bought in
MS-SQL based on bought in SQL
NT (1993 NT3.1 to todays Win7) based on 1989 MS OS/2, IBM OS/2 and VMS.
IE based on Mosaic?
(I have a Mosaic floppy someplace)
Have they really added much of value to Word/Excel since Office 4.3?
/95. I have a bunch of Word 2.0a licences and discs!
I do use Office 2002/XP, but increasingly Open Office.
Anyway, I used UCSD-pSystem on my native Apple II and Z80 card + CP/M
for Supercalc and Wordstar. I never bothered with Basic till VB6 (as a
GUI for MS-SQL database).
> Anyway, I used UCSD-pSystem on my native Apple II and Z80 card + CP/M
> for Supercalc and Wordstar. I never bothered with Basic till VB6 (as a
> GUI for MS-SQL database).
>
I know they have bought things, they real question is would those software
companies survive without having acquired by MS? Having said that I do not
really like Microsoft nor Apple policies, but they were hugely impact the
computing we know today.
Tamas Rudnai wrote:
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Michael Watterson <mikeKILLspamradioway.org>wrote:
>
>
>> Anyway, I used UCSD-pSystem on my native Apple II and Z80 card + CP/M
>> for Supercalc and Wordstar. I never bothered with Basic till VB6 (as a
>> GUI for MS-SQL database).
>>
>>
>
> Was that z80 card this one?
>
> http://www.z80.eu/apple2.html
>
> I know they have bought things, they real question is would those software
> companies survive without having acquired by MS? Having said that I do not
> really like Microsoft nor Apple policies, but they were hugely impact the
> computing we know today.
>
>
Probably. However we didn't have media issues with CP/M we also had a
pair of 8" floppy drives in a big box.
We also fitted the Apple II into an all in one case with brown / amber
CRT, 80 column card and expanded keyboard with Num pad.
about 6 months later we had the ACT Sirius 1, (Same as USA Victor
9000),. and later our ground floor tenant had a rather Lower Spec IBM PC.
MS and IBM really held back computing for 10 years IMO.
The ACT had 800x400 graphics, 1Mbyte floppies, 8086 rather than PCs
8088, RTC, Serial, GPIB, Parallel, sound as standard. All options on PC.
Hercules graphics was much later too
Michael Watterson wrote:
>
> y. However we didn't have media issues with CP/M we also had a
> pair of 8" floppy drives in a big box.
>
> We also fitted the Apple II into an all in one case with brown / amber
> CRT, 80 column card and expanded keyboard with Num pad.
> about 6 months later we had the ACT Sirius 1, (Same as USA Victor
> 9000),. and later our ground floor tenant had a rather Lower Spec IBM PC.
>
I still have this from about 1988 in attic http://www.z80.eu/cps8256.html
With regular 3.5" 720k floppy as second drive and 3" drive with PC cable
to fit on PC.
Also "NICE22" DOS software to read CP/M disks inc Amstrad on PC.
I ran CP/M Newstar (wordstar clone also on DOS) + Supercalc rather than
Locscript.
Also Modula-2, Prolog, Filter analysis /Spice and some other CP/M softwares.
> MS and IBM really held back computing for 10 years IMO.
Probably, but then there was a reason why Apple III and Lisa was
unsuccessful after Apple II was virtually ruling the market. As far as I
remember there were some performance issues and/or maybe compatibility as
well with the newer Motorola CPUs?
Add price to the list, what I remember Lisa was like double the cost of
the II, and didn't do that much more.
On 5/15/2010 2:46 PM, Tamas Rudnai wrote: {Quote hidden}
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Michael Watterson<EraseMEmikespam_OUTTakeThisOuTradioway.org>wrote:
>
>
>> MS and IBM really held back computing for 10 years IMO.
>>
>
> Probably, but then there was a reason why Apple III and Lisa was
> unsuccessful after Apple II was virtually ruling the market. As far as I
> remember there were some performance issues and/or maybe compatibility as
> well with the newer Motorola CPUs?
>
> Tamas
>
> I remember the Lisa was a lot more expensive. I think it used the MC68000
> instead of the 6502. Didn't it also have a GUI?
>
Yes, it had a GUI OS.
BTW on my Apple II I had a mouse too with a PaintBrush style drawing
software. That was very advanced by that time. As far as I remember on Apple
IIe or IIc it was also possible to use a GUI OS which was like an
extra terrestrial operating system to me :-)
Tamas Rudnai wrote:
>
>
> Probably, but then there was a reason why Apple III and Lisa was
> unsuccessful after Apple II was virtually ruling the market. As far as I
> remember there were some performance issues and/or maybe compatibility as
> well with the newer Motorola CPUs?
>
> Tamas
>
Lisa
Xerox Parc ideas on a badly designed HW with not enough resource. Stupid
case design too.
Apple doesn't always succeed with the reality distortion field. I
remember Pippin and Newton.
Apple II didn't rule the market in Ireland or Europe. If it hadn't been
for visicalc, it would have died. It was quite quickly overtaken by
competition.
The spreadsheet was main initial impetus of micro computer / PC. A
daisywheel was too expensive for WP to be popular.
Specialist vertical market apps based on databases.
Then Wordprocessing was 3rd really.
My 1st printer was an MX80. There was a couple of years when NLQ (Not
really Letter Quality) Dot matrix was used by small businesses for letters.
Most people seem to use their applications full screen still, today.
Increasing with Smaller screens. I had DR-Multidos which let you run
many DOS apps and flip between them.
I think you are right on the MC68000, but I never used it, there was
only one secretary (Admin) that was trained to use it for word
processing, and probably Visacalc spreadsheet. So I don't know about the
GUI. The closest thing on a home computerto Windows back then was Gary
Kildall's Digital Research GUI that would run 4 virtual windows, switch
between them with CTRL-#, where # was any number between 1 - 4. Our
Engine Plant (Ford 302, 5.0L including the Mustang GT) plant Engineering
(facilities) office had a Apple II with the Z80 card and CPM. It had a
good sized rugged carrying case, and we could take it including the
monitor, home evenings and weekends. My kids would play "Brick Out". :)
On 5/15/2010 3:59 PM, Harold Hallikainen wrote: {Quote hidden}
>
>> Add price to the list, what I remember Lisa was like double the cost of
>> the II, and didn't do that much more.
>>
> I remember the Lisa was a lot more expensive. I think it used the MC68000
> instead of the 6502. Didn't it also have a GUI?
>
> Harold
>
>
>
Carl Denk wrote:
> I think you are right on the MC68000, but I never used it, there was
> only one secretary (Admin) that was tr
>> I remember the Lisa was a lot more expensive. I think it used the MC68000
>> instead of the 6502. Didn't it also have a GUI?
>>
>> Harold
>>
>>
>>
>>
The 1st Macs had 68000 also, and OS in rom + one 3.5" floppy. I had one
in attic for a while someone gave me.
I think pretty much the original Mac was a Lisa mkII and Apple III was a
cost reduced Apple II mkII.
Probably all on wikipedia. They later had 68020, dunno when they moved
to Power PC.
The first decent Windows was 3.1 protected mode on 386 (1991?), but
mostly 16bit. Apple I think was 68040 by then.
By 1993/1994 WFWG3.11 had 32bit TCP/IP, 32bit Disk driver, and 32bit
W32s which could run NT3.x 32 bit apps, also 32bit VFW.
As much a DOS/Windows/16bit/32bit hybrid as Win95, but without explorer.
Office 95 used specially invented APIs so it wouldn't work on
win3.x/wfwg3.x, which meant it didn't work on NT3.5 either so NT3.5
users got a free upgrade to NT3.51.
Basically by 1994 IBM (OS/2) and windows had caught up and then win95
killed OS/2 and damaged MS's own superior NT3.5 sales due to extensive
HW support and ability to run DOS games, and Win3.x software. (NT3.5x
only ran DOS and Win3.x apps in a virtual Machine and wouldn't run DOS
games. Good Open GL, win95 had no native Open GL and didn't add USB till
later )
hallikainen.com>wrote:
