BASIC

Revision as of 15:35, 17 July 2011 (view source)

Nickm (Talk | contribs)

(→Altair BASIC and Micro-Soft)

← Older edit

Revision as of 15:39, 17 July 2011 (view source)

Nickm (Talk | contribs)

(Added references for Gates letters)

Newer edit →

Line 110:

In ''Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution,'' Steven Levy describes the early history of home computing and the development of BASICs for the Altair and its immediate successors as a battle between an ethic of openness and the sort of corporate powers who were "a foe of the Hacker Ethic" (227).

−

This portrayal has helped to set up what is often remembered as the first major clash between free software and the corporate will of Microsoft: Bill Gates' "Open Letter to Hobbyists." Published in February 1976 in the ''Altair Users' Newsletter'' as well as the newsletter of the Homebrew Computer Club, this confrontational letter gave Gates the opportunity to scold home computer users for the same kind of sharing that the original BASIC at Dartmouth encouraged. In the letter, Gates soundly declared, "As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software." The letter spurred hundreds of responses, public and personal, causing the first major controversy in home computing. Many see it as the start of Microsoft's history of unfair dealing -- and of embracing and extending, a practice in which the company takes existing tools and ideas and creates its own version for competitive advantage. Decades later in the antitrust case against Microsoft, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson would write that "Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect." He was hardly the only one with this view by that point. Did Microsoft's rise to the height of corporate ruthlessness begin with this letter to hobbyists?

+

This portrayal has helped to set up what is often remembered as the first major clash between free software and the corporate will of Microsoft: Bill Gates' "Open Letter to Hobbyists" (Gates January 1976). Published at the beginning of 1976 in numerous newsletters, including the ''Altair Users' Newsletter'' and that of the Homebrew Computer Club, this confrontational letter gave Gates the opportunity to scold home computer users for the same kind of sharing that the original BASIC at Dartmouth encouraged. In the letter, Gates soundly declared, "As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software." The letter spurred hundreds of responses, public and personal, causing the first major controversy in home computing. Many see it as the start of Microsoft's history of unfair dealing -- and of embracing and extending, a practice in which the company takes existing tools and ideas and creates its own version for competitive advantage. Decades later in the antitrust case against Microsoft, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson would write that "Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect." He was hardly the only one with this view by that point. Did Microsoft's rise to the height of corporate ruthlessness begin with this letter to hobbyists?

−

Perhaps not. There are a few complications to the most popular version of this early clash, with too simplistic assignment of good and evil roles, just as there are complications in considering Altair BASIC as completely bad and TinyBASIC as pure and just. To begin with, neither Microsoft, nor Gates, nor Allen was the party originally fingered in Levy's book as the "foe" of the hacker ethic. That distinction belongs to Ed Roberts, the head of MITS, who was running a business with dozens of employees, many of whom would be furiously working at any given hour to fulfill computer hobbyists' orders (and their dreams of computer ownership). At the beginning of 1976, "Micro-Soft" (the spelling had not been regularized by the time of the first letter) was simply two partners, both recent college drop-outs, one a teenager and other only slightly older. The company had paid other people, such as BASIC contributor Davidoff, but would not gets its first official employee until April 1976.

+

There are a few complications to the most popular version of this early clash, with too simplistic assignment of good and evil roles, just as there are complications in considering Altair BASIC as completely bad and TinyBASIC as pure and just. To begin with, neither Microsoft, nor Gates, nor Allen were the party originally fingered in Levy's book as the "foe" of the hacker ethic. That distinction belongs to Ed Roberts, the head of MITS, who was running a business with dozens of employees, many of whom would be furiously working at any given hour to fulfill computer hobbyists' orders (and their dreams of computer ownership). At the beginning of 1976, "Micro-Soft" (the spelling had not been regularized by the time of the first letter) was simply two partners, both recent college drop-outs, one a teenager and other only slightly older. The company had paid other people, such as BASIC contributor Davidoff, but would not gets its first official employee until April 1976.

Furthermore, copyright protection for computer programs, which Gates based his argument upon, was well-established by 1976. While sharing of programs certainly happened in users' groups and other contexts, today's concept of free software had not been articulated by that time. Richard Stallman started the GNU project in 1983; he published the GNU Manifesto and founded the Free Software Foundation in 1985, a decade after Altair BASIC. An argument has been made that, even though this story has been overlooked, some of the ideas important to the free software movement were first publicly stated in the columns of magazines and newsletters in response to Gates's letter (Driscoll). But many hobbyists were not interested in free (as in freedom) software as it is conceptualized today; rather, they were interested in (as the editorial in the first issue of ''Dr. Dobbs'' explained) "free and very inexpensive" software.

Line 118:

In the aftermath of his first letter, Gates wrote a "Second and Final Letter," replying to objections raised by his readers. In it, he also admitted that, at least for certain types of programs, the free sharing of code was likely to become the norm. He even suggested that good "compilers and interpreters" (such as Microsoft's Altair BASIC) would enable such shared software:

−

<blockquote>In discussing software, I don't want to leave out the most important aspect, vis., the exchange of those programs less complex than interpreters or compilers that can be written by hobbyists and shared at little or no cost. I think in the foreseeable future, literally thousands of such programs will be available through user libraries. The availability of standardized compilers and interpreters will have a major impact on how quickly these libraries develop and how useful they are.</blockquote>

+

<blockquote>In discussing software, I don't want to leave out the most important aspect, vis., the exchange of those programs less complex than interpreters or compilers that can be written by hobbyists and shared at little or no cost. I think in the foreseeable future, literally thousands of such programs will be available through user libraries. The availability of standardized compilers and interpreters will have a major impact on how quickly these libraries develop and how useful they are. (Gates April 1976)</blockquote>

Gates certainly had a concept of software that would allow for it to be sold and tightly controlled by a corporation, but he was hardly seeking to eliminate hobbyist programming and the sharing of code. The company's policies did run counter to the ethic of the Homebrew Computer Club and the People's Computer Company in significant ways; yet Microsoft facilitated not only the creation of new software with its version of BASIC, but also the exchange of programs that Gates mentioned. Through licensing deals with computer companies, Microsoft did a great deal to bring BASIC out of the minicomputer time-sharing environment and onto microcomputers and beyond, to the early adopters and enthusiast programmers. Microsoft indeed signaled it was not completely at odds with the PCC, in Appendix M of the original Altair BASIC manual. On its list of "a few of the many texts that may be helpful in learning BASIC," all but one of the books can be ordered from the PCC, whose address is provided. Five of the six books are about BASIC specifically, but the manual also lists the radical and counter-cultural ''Computer Lib/Dream Machines'' by Theodore H. Nelson (1974), an edition of which Microsoft would itself publish in 1987.

From Maze

Revision as of 15:39, 17 July 2011

Views

Personal tools

Navigation

Search

Toolbox

@@ Line 110: / Line 110: @@
 In ''Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution,'' Steven Levy describes the early history of home computing and the development of BASICs for the Altair and its immediate successors as a battle between an ethic of openness and the sort of corporate powers who were "a foe of the Hacker Ethic" (227).
-This portrayal has helped to set up what is often remembered as the first major clash between free software and the corporate will of Microsoft: Bill Gates' "Open Letter to Hobbyists." Published in February 1976 in the ''Altair Users' Newsletter'' as well as the newsletter of the Homebrew Computer Club, this confrontational letter gave Gates the opportunity to scold home computer users for the same kind of sharing that the original BASIC at Dartmouth encouraged. In the letter, Gates soundly declared, "As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software." The letter spurred hundreds of responses, public and personal, causing the first major controversy in home computing. Many see it as the start of Microsoft's history of unfair dealing -- and of embracing and extending, a practice in which the company takes existing tools and ideas and creates its own version for competitive advantage. Decades later in the antitrust case against Microsoft, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson would write that "Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect." He was hardly the only one with this view by that point. Did Microsoft's rise to the height of corporate ruthlessness begin with this letter to hobbyists?
+This portrayal has helped to set up what is often remembered as the first major clash between free software and the corporate will of Microsoft: Bill Gates' "Open Letter to Hobbyists" (Gates January 1976). Published at the beginning of 1976 in numerous newsletters, including the ''Altair Users' Newsletter'' and that of the Homebrew Computer Club, this confrontational letter gave Gates the opportunity to scold home computer users for the same kind of sharing that the original BASIC at Dartmouth encouraged. In the letter, Gates soundly declared, "As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software." The letter spurred hundreds of responses, public and personal, causing the first major controversy in home computing. Many see it as the start of Microsoft's history of unfair dealing -- and of embracing and extending, a practice in which the company takes existing tools and ideas and creates its own version for competitive advantage. Decades later in the antitrust case against Microsoft, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson would write that "Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect." He was hardly the only one with this view by that point. Did Microsoft's rise to the height of corporate ruthlessness begin with this letter to hobbyists?
-Perhaps not. There are a few complications to the most popular version of this early clash, with too simplistic assignment of good and evil roles, just as there are complications in considering Altair BASIC as completely bad and TinyBASIC as pure and just. To begin with, neither Microsoft, nor Gates, nor Allen was the party originally fingered in Levy's book as the "foe" of the hacker ethic. That distinction belongs to Ed Roberts, the head of MITS, who was running a business with dozens of employees, many of whom would be furiously working at any given hour to fulfill computer hobbyists' orders (and their dreams of computer ownership). At the beginning of 1976, "Micro-Soft" (the spelling had not been regularized by the time of the first letter) was simply two partners, both recent college drop-outs, one a teenager and other only slightly older. The company had paid other people, such as BASIC contributor Davidoff, but would not gets its first official employee until April 1976.
+There are a few complications to the most popular version of this early clash, with too simplistic assignment of good and evil roles, just as there are complications in considering Altair BASIC as completely bad and TinyBASIC as pure and just. To begin with, neither Microsoft, nor Gates, nor Allen were the party originally fingered in Levy's book as the "foe" of the hacker ethic. That distinction belongs to Ed Roberts, the head of MITS, who was running a business with dozens of employees, many of whom would be furiously working at any given hour to fulfill computer hobbyists' orders (and their dreams of computer ownership). At the beginning of 1976, "Micro-Soft" (the spelling had not been regularized by the time of the first letter) was simply two partners, both recent college drop-outs, one a teenager and other only slightly older. The company had paid other people, such as BASIC contributor Davidoff, but would not gets its first official employee until April 1976.
 Furthermore, copyright protection for computer programs, which Gates based his argument upon, was well-established by 1976. While sharing of programs certainly happened in users' groups and other contexts, today's concept of free software had not been articulated by that time. Richard Stallman started the GNU project in 1983; he published the GNU Manifesto and founded the Free Software Foundation in 1985, a decade after Altair BASIC. An argument has been made that, even though this story has been overlooked, some of the ideas important to the free software movement were first publicly stated in the columns of magazines and newsletters in response to Gates's letter (Driscoll). But many hobbyists were not interested in free (as in freedom) software as it is conceptualized today; rather, they were interested in (as the editorial in the first issue of ''Dr. Dobbs'' explained) "free and very inexpensive" software.
@@ Line 118: / Line 118: @@
 In the aftermath of his first letter, Gates wrote a "Second and Final Letter," replying to objections raised by his readers. In it, he also admitted that, at least for certain types of programs, the free sharing of code was likely to become the norm. He even suggested that good "compilers and interpreters" (such as Microsoft's Altair BASIC) would enable such shared software:
-<blockquote>In discussing software, I don't want to leave out the most important aspect, vis., the exchange of those programs less complex than interpreters or compilers that can be written by hobbyists and shared at little or no cost. I think in the foreseeable future, literally thousands of such programs will be available through user libraries. The availability of standardized compilers and interpreters will have a major impact on how quickly these libraries develop and how useful they are.</blockquote>
+<blockquote>In discussing software, I don't want to leave out the most important aspect, vis., the exchange of those programs less complex than interpreters or compilers that can be written by hobbyists and shared at little or no cost. I think in the foreseeable future, literally thousands of such programs will be available through user libraries. The availability of standardized compilers and interpreters will have a major impact on how quickly these libraries develop and how useful they are. (Gates April 1976)</blockquote>
 Gates certainly had a concept of software that would allow for it to be sold and tightly controlled by a corporation, but he was hardly seeking to eliminate hobbyist programming and the sharing of code. The company's policies did run counter to the ethic of the Homebrew Computer Club and the People's Computer Company in significant ways; yet Microsoft facilitated not only the creation of new software with its version of BASIC, but also the exchange of programs that Gates mentioned. Through licensing deals with computer companies, Microsoft did a great deal to bring BASIC out of the minicomputer time-sharing environment and onto microcomputers and beyond, to the early adopters and enthusiast programmers. Microsoft indeed signaled it was not completely at odds with the PCC, in Appendix M of the original Altair BASIC manual. On its list of "a few of the many texts that may be helpful in learning BASIC," all but one of the books can be ordered from the PCC, whose address is provided. Five of the six books are about BASIC specifically, but the manual also lists the radical and counter-cultural ''Computer Lib/Dream Machines'' by Theodore H. Nelson (1974), an edition of which Microsoft would itself publish in 1987.