eirikur@amber.DEC (Eirikur Hallgrimsson) (05/30/85)
I need some enlightenment. I've heard of a product, (from Apple, I assume) called MAC Basic. Yesterday in the MIT Coop I ran across a nice thick book about it, better than the average DEC language manual (ok, folks, that's a high standard), from SYBEX publishing. It didn't say one word about MicroSoft. I checked some syntax and keywords against an MS Basic manual. Clearly different. The book was really nice. Lots of good detail, ToolBox access, etc. Looked like it was all done on a LaserWriter. No one sells MAC basic. Only MS Basic, though some ads list it as MAC basic. I've even heard, (faintly) about people having this product in some form. Does this thing exist, (and if so, what is it?) or is it all confusion about MS Basic V2 or something like that? Eirikur Hallgrimsson ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!eirikur Posted: Thu 30-May-1985 16:05 Marlborough uncorrected time. To: RHEA::DECWRL::net.micro.mac To: RHEA::DECWRL::"net.micro.mac"
vishniac@wanginst.UUCP (Ephraim Vishniac) (06/04/85)
> I've heard of a product, (from Apple, I assume) called MAC Basic. > Yesterday in the MIT Coop I ran across a nice thick book about it, > better than the average DEC language manual (ok, folks, that's a high > standard), from SYBEX publishing. It didn't say one word about > MicroSoft. I checked some syntax and keywords against an MS Basic > manual. Clearly different. > ... > I've even heard, (faintly) about people having this product in some > form. > > Does this thing exist, (and if so, what is it?) or is it all > confusion about MS Basic V2 or something like that? I have a copy of the Sybex book (bought it in the Harvard Coop, in fact). It does say a couple of words about Microsoft Basic, by way of contrast to Mac Basic. I've also seen a copy of Mac Basic (the actual software). It was a pre-release, version number somewhat less than 0.5, if I recall. The story I've heard is that MS Basic, version 1, was based on the typical MS Basic for typical PC's, which is why it was so lousy on the Mac. According to the story, MS Basic, version 2, *is* Mac Basic, after Microsoft bought it from the original developers. I'm not sure this is entirely true, but there is a striking resemblance. I haven't checked in much detail. I bought MS Basic a few weeks ago, but I've been tied up with other things and haven't done a lot with it. -- Ephraim Vishniac [apollo, bbncca, cadmus, decvax, harvard, linus, masscomp]!wanginst!vishniac vishniac%Wang-Inst@Csnet-Relay
jww@sdcsvax.UUCP (Joel West) (06/06/85)
> > I've heard of a product, (from Apple, I assume) called MAC Basic. > > Yesterday in the MIT Coop I ran across a nice thick book about it, > > Does this thing exist, (and if so, what is it?) or is it all > > confusion about MS Basic V2 or something like that? > > The story I've heard is that MS Basic, version 1, was based on the typical > MS Basic for typical PC's, which is why it was so lousy on the Mac. > According to the story, MS Basic, version 2, *is* Mac Basic, after Microsoft > bought it from the original developers. I met the author of that book at the Macworld Expo in San Francisco (2/85) at a seminar that was basically (ugh!) a "Battle of the Basics" seminar. These are two, COMPLETELY DISTINCT products. MacBasic is an Apple-label product (developed somewhare else, I believe) ala MacPascal. MS-BASIC, is, of course, from Microsoft. They are not very compatible. The big question is, will MacBasic ever see the light of day? Rumor is Bill Gates has pressured Jobs not to release MacBasic. I saw a pre-release of MacBasic before MSB 2.0, but after MSB 2.0, I'm not really sure what the point is. Obviously Microsoft knew that this other Basic was coming, and they rushed to bring their own copy up to snuff before they got put out of business. I'm actually please with uSoft, since I have a copy of MSB 2.0 that works and is useful; I have yet to see MacBasic out there in an official form (I feel sorry for Kastner, though, if it dies on the vine) -- Joel West CACI, Inc. -- Federal {allegra, decvax, ucbvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!jww jww@sdcsvax.ARPA The opinions expressed are not necessarily anybody's, including my own...
lantz@dartvax.UUCP (Bob Lantz) (06/07/85)
Apple has not yet released its version of the new ANSI standard BASIC,
but Dartmouth College has been using a pre-release version for several
months. A completed and debugged version should prove to be outstanding.
Current features include:
a MacPascal-like user interface
concurrent program execution
a full set of programming structures
among others!
Expect Apple's MacBasic sometime later this year. True BASIC, Kemeny
and Kurtz's version of the ANSI standard should also be out by then,
and a comparison will be interesting (the MS-DOS version was reviewed
in a recent BYTE and the prerelease is being used here already, with
difficulty.)
- Bob Lantz
(lantz@dartmouth)darin@tmq.UUCP (Darin Adler) (06/08/85)
> > I've heard of a product, (from Apple, I assume) called MAC Basic. > > Yesterday in the MIT Coop I ran across a nice thick book about it, > > better than the average DEC language manual (ok, folks, that's a high > > standard), from SYBEX publishing. It didn't say one word about > > MicroSoft. I checked some syntax and keywords against an MS Basic > > manual. Clearly different. > > The story I've heard is that MS Basic, version 1, was based on the typical > MS Basic for typical PC's, which is why it was so lousy on the Mac. > According to the story, MS Basic, version 2, *is* Mac Basic, after Microsoft > bought it from the original developers. I'm not sure this is entirely true, > but there is a striking resemblance. I haven't checked in much detail. > I bought MS Basic a few weeks ago, but I've been tied up with other things > and haven't done a lot with it. > NOT TRUE. MacBasic is a product which Apple has been developing for a long time. It is by Donn Dennsmore, the author of Business Basic for the Apple ///. It is a great deal more sophisticated than MS-Basic (even version 2). The most recent versions I have seen (with version numbers in the .8's and .9's) have had auto-refreshing windows, extensive debugging aids (similar to those in Macintosh Pascal), considerable toolbox support (for an interpreter), and a number of other goodies. If you are interested in BASIC, I am sure it will be a worth- while product, however I am not sure when Apple will make it available (or even if it will ever be). Darin Adler ihnp4!tmq!darin
lsr@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein) (06/10/85)
In article <915@sdcsvax.UUCP> jww@sdcsvax.UUCP (Joel West) writes: > These are two, COMPLETELY DISTINCT products. MacBasic is >an Apple-label product (developed somewhare else, I believe) ala >MacPascal. Macintosh Basic was developed by people at Apple, not by an outside firm. There was an article in the April 1985 Nibble Magazine comparing Macintosh Basic to Microsoft Basic. -- Larry Rosenstein Apple Computer UUCP: {nsc, dual, voder, ios}!apple!lsr CSNET: lsr@Apple.CSNET
steve@tove.UUCP (Steve D. Miller) (06/12/85)
> ... > The story I've heard is that MS Basic, version 1, was based on the typical > MS Basic for typical PC's, which is why it was so lousy on the Mac. > According to the story, MS Basic, version 2, *is* Mac Basic, after Microsoft > bought it from the original developers. I'm not sure this is entirely true, > but there is a striking resemblance. I haven't checked in much detail. > I bought MS Basic a few weeks ago, but I've been tied up with other things > and haven't done a lot with it. > > -- > Ephraim Vishniac > [apollo, bbncca, cadmus, decvax, harvard, linus, masscomp]!wanginst!vishniac > vishniac%Wang-Inst@Csnet-Relay I have a copy of MacBasic (the one that Apple is/was going to market) that I got from somewhere or another. It is a very flaky pre-release version, but it is (I believe, though I haven't looked at it in a while) more recent than MS Basic 2.0 and (from poking around with FEdit) it looks like it has well-nigh total toolbox support. The toolbox routines are even called with their Inside Mac names (i.e. there are functions like TEUpdate), and there is even some stuff about it that leads me to believe that it may truly be incrementally compiled (not just tokenized). Given the above information, I would think that it is still going to be released -- in fact, I think I heard the words "late summer '85" somewhere -- and that it will be nicer than MS Basic and about as nice as something as icky as BASIC can be. If I get the time in the next few days, I'll try to poke about with my copy and see what I can figure out, and let people know if they are interested. -- Spoken: Steve Miller ARPA: steve@maryland Phone: +1-301-454-4251 CSNet: steve@umcp-cs UUCP: {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!steve USPS: Computer Science Dept., University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
lsr@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein) (06/13/85)
In article <192@tmq.UUCP> darin@tmq.UUCP (Darin Adler) writes: >It [Macintosh Basic] is by Donn Dennsmore, the author of Business Basic >for the Apple ///. As long as we are naming names, we might as well get them right. Macintosh Basic was written by Donn Denman, with help from Marianne Hsiung, Larry Kenyon, and Bryan Stearns. -- Larry Rosenstein Apple Computer UUCP: {nsc, dual, voder, ios}!apple!lsr CSNET: lsr@Apple.CSNET