IBM ROM BASIC or lack thereof

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sun Sep 30 10:47:27 2001

Yes, the MBC was a mess, but what were the problems with GWBASIC? It wasn't
exactly like IBM basic, but it was OK, wasn't it? What "bad" points were you
remembering?

Dick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ Blakeman" <rhblakeman_at_kih.net>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 9:10 AM
Subject: RE: IBM ROM BASIC or lack thereof


> Without the BASIC interpreter we ended up with GW-BASIC, which had some good
> points but other bad points. I had a Sanyo MBC-555-2 then and it was a
> bigger mess even than the other clones as it had bitmapped CGA, strange
> memory mapping, a non-standard BIOS (you had to get Sanyo's own DOS or an
> aftermarket enhancement, not PC-DOS or MS-DOS off the shelf). I learned a
> lot from that POS though.
>
> -> -----Original Message-----
> -> From: owner-classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org
> -> [mailto:owner-classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of Hans B Pufal
> -> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 8:56 AM
> -> To: classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org
> -> Subject: Re: IBM ROM BASIC or lack thereof
> ->
> ->
> -> Russ Blakeman wrote:
> ->
> -> > If memory serves the one real thing that cloners couldn't
> -> duplicate, maybe
> -> > due to copyright, was the ROM BASIC but that they'd duplicated
> -> everything
> -> > else including the BIOS or a very good part of it.
> ->
> ->
> -> Correct. The main BIOS source code was published in the IBM tech ref
> -> manuals. The BASIC was not and AFAIK no clone maker ever included a
> -> BASIC interpreter in the ROM. I don't think anyone missed it. DOS
> -> always included an advanced BASIC interpreter which was available to all.
> ->
> -> > That pretty much led to IBM losing a lot in the PC market.
> ->
> -> Unclear. They certainly lost market share, but it can be argued that
> -> without the clone market the whole personal computer market would have
> -> been much smaller and diverse and arguably better.
> ->
> -> -- HBP
> ->
> ->
>
>
Received on Sun Sep 30 2001 - 10:47:27 BST