!Re: Nuke Redmond!

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Fri Apr 7 22:09:00 2000

please see embedded remarks below.

Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Ford <mikeford_at_socal.rr.com>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: !Re: Nuke Redmond!


> >On Fri, Apr 07, 2000 at 03:13:47PM -0400, Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner
wrote:
> >> Apple was working on a version of BASIC for the Macintosh that would
> >> resemble VB today in the late 80s/early 90s. Microsoft got wind of it
and
> >> threatened to cut their license to Microsoft BASIC for the APPLE II
(still
> >> amoney maker at the time) if Apple actually released the product.
Apple
> >> towed the line and what do you know---Microsoft produces this very
> >> innovative product called Visual Basic shortly thereafter, but for
Windows.
> >>

MS needed a quick and dirty way to glue their software's work products
together. This provided and easy interface to other applications from MS as
well as from others. It's become more specialized and less necessary over
the years, though.

> >> To my knowledge, the Apple ``Visual Basic'' never saw the light of
day.
> >
> >I heard the same story when I did an internship at Apple in summer '89.
> >The way I heard it, the Mac BASIC actually got as far as field test
before
> >Billy strong-armed Apple into suppressing it and leaving the BASIC market
> >to M$.
>
> I more or less agree, except I still have MS Qbasic for the mac, and I
> believe that was the product MS threatened with, and still dropped once
the
> Apple basic was dead.
>
If you want to, I'd guess you can find a predatory practice under every
leaf. Do you really suppose that's what this was? Seeing the BASIC go by
the wayside doesn't make me terribly sad, but I've not seen the Apple/Mac
cut at the task. Was it any good?
>
Received on Fri Apr 07 2000 - 22:09:00 BST