It’s not often you’ll see us singing the praises of Microsoft on these pages, but credit where credit is due, this first-person account of how the software giant got its foot in the proverbial door by Bill Gates himself is pretty slick.
Now it’s not the story that has us excited, mind you. It’s the website itself. As you scroll down the page, the text and images morph around in a very pleasing and retro-inspired way. Running your cursor over the text makes it flip through random ASCII characters, reminding us a bit of the “decryption” effect from Sneakers. Even the static images have dithering applied to them as if they’re being rendered on some ancient piece of hardware. We don’t know who’s doing Billy’s web design, but we’d love to have them come refresh our Retro Edition.
Presentation aside, for those who don’t know the story: back in 1975, Gates and Paul Allen told the manufacturer of the Altair 8800 that they had a version of BASIC that would run on the computer and make it easier for people to use. Seeing the potential for increased sales, the company was very interested, and asked them to come give a demonstration of the software in a few weeks.
There was just one problem — Bill and Paul lied. They had never even seen an Altair in person, let alone wrote any code for one. So they set off on a mad dash to complete the project in time, with Allen famously still working on the code on the plane as they flew to the meeting. As you’ve probably guessed, they ended up pulling it off, and the rest is history.
At the very end of the page, you can download the actual source code for Altair BASIC that Gates and Allen co-delivered, presented as scans of the original printout. A little light reading as you wait to find out if that latest Windows update that’s installing is going to tell you that your machine is too old to use anymore.
In 1975, Paul Allen and I created Microsoft because we believed in our vision of gouging out every cent for software you use – fixed it for ya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists
Nice essay, but I wish Gates had used his resources to keep the Living Computer Museum alive! That was a fantastic archive of Microsoft’s early history.
Agreed. Or, at least arranged for its collection to be merged with the Computer History Museum’s.
That would have been nice.
Even better would have been Paul Allen himself making arrangements ahead of time. Same for his aviation/combat armor museum, although that one was thankfully (mostly) saved by being sold (mostly) intact to another collector.
Not to drop names, but I’m friends with someone who knew Paul quite well in that circle. Long story short, he had more than enough money to leave each of his museums (he also had an art museum that shuttered after his passing) set up with endowments that could have kept them going in perpetuity. Instead he entrusted everything to his sister, who apparently did not give a rat’s @$$ about any of his passions and let everything die on the vine as soon as he was gone. But it’s not like he got hit by a bus – he knew the end was coming. He could have taken steps to ensure his legacy remained across each of these endeavors, but didn’t. I can’t speak to why he did what he did, and my intent is not to speak ill of the dead, but state the facts. He was one of the wealthiest men in the world, and he could have funded all of this easily, and set it up in a legally binding way to ensure that legacy continues. But for whatever reason chose not to.
Perhaps he had other things to do that were more important to him in his last days.
Sigh. That old story again. 🙄
Long story short, the US copyright law undervent a change at the time.
Before that letter was written, it was still legal to exchange programs free of charge.
Universities did it all the time, it was just common practice to share information.
And when the first computer hobbyists were around, there was no market for commercial software yet.
Hence it’s not fair to see them as inresponsible hippies who don’t care about laws. That view is too simple.
Alas, this aspect is often being forgotten. Many things aren’t seen in their historic context, sadly.
It would be interesting to compare the source code from Paul & Bill with the original Dartmouth BASIC source code that was released in 1964.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dartmouth_BASIC
The website design is cool, but it has also made me aware that I apparently run the cursor along under the text I’m reading, which makes reading the site annoying as heck.
I just found it repelling.
Look, I’m no fan of today’s Microsoft, but credit where credit is due. They did manage to become the supplier of the default operating system for the world’s most popular computer. I have a bone to pick with them about the quality of today’s Windows and Office, but those, too are an accomplishment (the fact that Linux and its various office apps are competitive points out that Microsoft’s accomplishment may not be as remarkable as they’d like to believe).
To be honest, I feel that the open source software movement, sparked by Stallman, Torvalds and the millions of contributors is at least as important as Microsoft’s accomplishments, and likely will endure after Microsoft ceases to exist.
(and, yes, I run Linux on my home machine, Windows for work, and I see them essentially as equals, though with differences in goals and capabilities)
Maybe, maybe not. GnuChess had more influence to my life than Linux (yuck)!
“the default operating system for the world’s most popular computer.”
MINUX3 ?
Not a windows fan myself, but …
Honestly I’d say modern GUI Linux distros owe a lot to Windows (and Apple) for showing them what to aim for, and doing the work to establish the broad UX that users now expect.
Were it not for windows, I doubt Linux would have the usability and passable apps it has today.
Hu, please, no!
I mean, I would love to see an up to date version of the retro edition, that’s for sure!
But content wise, not “visaul gatget” wise.
THe goal of the retro edition is to be loaded on very old hardware, as a proof of work.
Not to be a flashy cool and unusuable version = )
I always wondered, how hard would it be to just update the retro edition at the same time as the official blog?
A simple script called once a day can be hacked quickly I presume.
Heck, it may take some time to generate the static page, but I’m sure that even with a raspberry pie it would take a second or two.
Heck, if I had to do it, I would probably generate pages of 10 articles, and only regenerate the first page as needed. So, yeah, the first page may not have 10 entries, but that would reduce the page generation to almost nothing.
I wished the “retro edition” was made properly – not just as a fashionable showcase thing good for an occasional laugh (aka gag for the party).
Rather, a real plain HTML 1.0 or 2.0 site with GIFs/JPGs and with HTTP server – because HTTPS is too computing heavy for vintage stuff, it’s unsupported by old systems.
So that the DOS geeks here can read the news using Arachne browser or Lynx or Minuet on their real DOS rig.
As if it was in 1994. Or use Gopher, it’s an alternative.
That would also be nice to the oldschool fans with CP/M machines, Amstrad/Sinclair machines running SymbOS, MSX computers, old PDAs etc.
Even if I don’t own such a machine (well, one that I could drive daily at least), I really would love that too.
Plus, it’s so simple nowadays that the data is separated from the form.
“Exporting” the articles in whatever format would be easy.
I need to test gopher on my server too, sounds fun, but I couldn’t find the time this last two years…
I’m bewildered that it’s not automatically produced; it should be pretty trivial to do from WP.
And in true Microsoft fashion, that website totally hogs my CPU. I’m on my work computer (during lunch break) so it’s not the usual “ancient” Core2Duo which I usually use to read HaD.
Found the offending code:
If Not header.UserAgent Like "*windows*" Then
crazycpuhog()
End If
I’m also at my (allegedly old now, 8th gen i5) work computer and it renders buttery smooth, at least on Edge… hhhmm but I do see crazy GPU utilization tho, in the 70-90% range.
As cool that is, MS are also responsible for “Embrace, Extend and Extinguish”. And they are still doing it today, they have embraced opensource and have now entered the extend phase. Now they have all their fingers in all the pies they are pushing hard for Rust to be added to all the most important open source projects. This has the effect or reducing the coders that can help and main these projects. Rust was a dead language abandoned by the person that created it. But then big tech grabbed it and put millions behind it. They use the guise that it’s for security and stability. But it was them that created all the issues in the first place. A bad workman blames their tools. As someone with a Masters in software engineering, all the issues and bugs caused in projects that use C are due to bad software engineering, not the language. Google have now changed how they release the source to Android moving development behind closed doors. In the next few years MS will attempt to do the same with the Linux kernel. Call me tin foil hat man as much as you like, but in five to ten years open source will have been killed. Don’t believe me??? Go look at who controls Rust, who is pushing it’s use and who is ‘extending’ the Linux kernel.
Making a Rust to C converter is not that hard. Imagine you have a toy box full of blocks, and each block has a special instruction on it, like “add 2 and 2” or “say hello”. These blocks are like a special language that only you and your friends can understand. Now, imagine you want to show these blocks to your friend who only understands a different language, like Legos. You need to translate the instructions on the blocks into Lego language, so your friend can understand what to do. That’s kind of like what we’re trying to do with the computer program. We have some code written in a language called Rust, and we want to translate it into a language called C, so that it can be used with another language called Python. To do this, we need to follow some steps: First, we need to read the Rust code and understand what it says. This is like reading the instructions on the blocks. Next, we need to translate the instructions into C language. This is like rewriting the instructions on the blocks in Lego language. Then, we need to make sure the C code can talk to Python. This is like building a special bridge between the Lego blocks and the Python toys, so they can work together. Finally, we need to test the translated code to make sure it works correctly. This is like playing with the Lego blocks and the Python toys together, to make sure they’re working as a team. It’s a bit like being a translator, a builder, and a tester all at once! But with the right tools and a few days of practice, we can make it happen.
That’s very simplified, I think.
The “problem” with C is that it’s being used to write operating systems and device drivers.
Especially when sensitive stuff like memory managment and DMA come into play.
Converting billions of lines of code automatically, without any error is not trivial.
It’s far from auto-converting a Hello World program.
Speaking of, I remember using a Basic to C transpiler decades ago.
It worked, but turned an one-liner Basic program into a construct of two dozen header and library files.
Its use made sense perhaps, if a very sophisticated Basic program would have had to be transpiled.
Now that I think of it, I believe to have heard that the Altair Basic did something similar.
Internally it converted Basic instructions to matching assembly language.
Syntax wise, I mean. The interpreter did an almost 1 by 1 translation.
Not all Basic interpreters worked exactly same, though.
This sounds kind of plausible to me, but I wonder: Isn’t that normal for US tech industry?
Isn’t that the “spirit” of it? If so, then where’s the problem then?
As far as I can think, big US tech companies (and US companies in general) and US capitalism as such always were about making profits at cost of the well beeing of others. And about the own wealth, about being in control (a given market etc).
Being “clever” by taking advantage of poor souls (unequal spread of vital knowledge between parties etc) had been rewarded, both socially and economically. Or isn’t that the truth?
The only exception that comes to mind used to be universities, maybe, but even them teach their students to think profitable now.
That’s why the whole situation of IT, globally, at moment is so crazy, I think.
Historically, for example, US companies barely have to pay taxes here in Europe, our own companies must pay much more.
Yet, US politicans are enraged about things being unfair – while the whole art of exploitation of humans is something I believe we had learned from US.
After the Second World War, they showed us how to do big business “correctly”.
Anyway, Silicon Valley always was about being first, being best, being in control of something technological leading.
That’s why I don’t understand why there’s a sense of morals or ethics at all so suddenly.
Where did that have been the past 60 years or so ? 🤔
No offense, but I thought that habit was just normal for US businesses.
And businesses in other places on earth today, who used it as a role model.
US corporations are actually required to focus on / devote themselves to profits (unless it’s a non-profit — totally different animal).
Kind of weirdly, but this is literally the law in the US — you can’t just take profits and donate them to charities unless you can demonstrate that it serves the good of the shareholders, same for raises, anything really – the shareholders always come first.
Right or wrong that’s a fundamental of capitalism — has been that way forever (like centuries).
BUT I don’t think it’s uniquely American — the East India Trading Company and the Opium Wars and the global slave trade and many many many other examples abound throughout the history of any country that had any meaningful mercantile or commerce component to its economy. It’s really only “state run” economies that don’t necessarily require profitability. However, the record is very clear that the vast majority of state run centrally planned economies tend to be highly inefficient and/or corrupt.
Yes, a heavy dose of socialism in the mix for the safety net and common good helps alleviate some of the greater evils of capitalism but that’s really only a “governor” layer on top of the capitalist profit centred drivers of wealth generation.
So far as I know there is no successful “zero cost” or “altruistic” economy anywhere in the world that is stable. The one possible exception could be/could have been wholly extractive economies where you just dig up / pump out the resources, sell them and distribute the wealth. However, again, those countries tend to be highly inefficient at equitable distribution of wealth and/or extremely corrupt.
As many have observed, very sadly, capitalism is the worst system in the world except when compared to everything else.
That said, the US’s collective dismantling of and abhorrence for both the social contract and the social safety net is disgusting and inexcusable and this long trend (decades really) is starting to create cracks in the system creating what I can only describe as “chaotic feedback loops” where you now see republicans dismantling free trade agreements, p*mping electric vehicles and cutting food stamp funding that goes for soda and surgery drinks (the number one expenditure for food stamps), thereby hurting large processed food manufacturers. These are not the actions of “republicans” or “conservatives” or even “populists” as those terms are traditionally understood. Which is not to imply they are altruistic behaviors but rather that the traditional labels are rapidly becoming meaningless.
“US corporations are actually required to focus on / devote themselves to profits (unless it’s a non-profit — totally different animal).
Kind of weirdly, but this is literally the law in the US … the shareholders always come first.
Right or wrong that’s a fundamental of capitalism — has been that way forever (like centuries).”
None of this is true. It was invented by Milton Friedman in 1970.
No, actually look at Dodge Bros vs Ford – 1919
Friedman was not the first to favour the idea but he made it “common knowledge”. As the Dodge vs Ford Wikipedia page notes it is not “literally the law”, there is no statute, disgruntled shareholders have to rely on sympathetic judges. Thanks to the “Law and Economics” program they are not hard to find these days.
‘Fiduciary responsibility to shareholders’ does not mean ‘focus on short term profit’.
That is just oft repeated commie derp.
It often does, but management has a lot of discretion.
Not like politicians, they always have to think short term.
Next election is their horizon.
Any promise past that date is just meaningless.
Thank you very much for reply!
I suppose it’s just a bit unusual to me, because I live in a different country. With some of those safety nets, I must admit.
There also was a wall separating it into to East/West,
so there was always sort of comparison happening in terms of pros/cons.
Even after cold war, citizen occasionally questioned what’s good/bad about each concept and how things can be done differently.
What I also found strange about the US law is trademark situation.
If you refuse to fight another company very hard, you may end up loosing your trademark.
If I understand correctly, the US law goes by logic that if you don’t violently defend your property then it has no value for you and you don’t deserve it anymore.
Which is tragic in case of things like fan products, in which US companies are basically being forced to fight their own customers in order not to loose their property in curt.
The US law forces them to be “mean”, in short – which hurts the company’s reputation.
I kind of understand the underlying logic, but I think it’s not entirely fair.
Companies who are trying to be forgiving and diplomatic shouldn’t have to suffer in the end effect.
“food stamp funding that goes for soda and surgery drinks (the number one expenditure for food stamps)”
Calling BS on that one. I’ve been on food stamps. Parenthetically, some things you can’t buy with them: alcohol, cigarettes, vitamins, and wait for it America: toilet paper. They say you can’t buy “hot food” but that means restaurant food, not grocery store hot food.
I checked a couple of studies – one said “surgery drinks” was #1 and one said #2. This one appears to be USDA putting it at #2 with a $600 million spend on surgery drinks in 2011. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/SNAPFoodsTypicallyPurchased-Summary.pdf
My point though isn’t that this is right or wrong but that banning surgery drinks from SNAP is certainly not “business friendly” (especially if it’s really that kind of spend) and smacks of “nanny state” type action – both traditionally antithetical to republicans and conservatives.
My point is not that Republicans/Conservatives are now suddenly concerned about SNAP recipient health even if it means harming big companies but rather that I don’t know what Republicans/Conservatives believe in anymore.
From your link:
“In transactions made with both SNAP and cash
or credit cards, these data could not differentiate
between items purchased with SNAP benefits
and those purchased with other funds. The data,
therefore, represent food purchases made by
SNAP households rather than the foods
purchased specifically with SNAP. (Most
SNAP households use a combination of benefits
and their own funds.)”
“Differences in the expenditure patterns of SNAP
and non-SNAP households were relatively
limited, regardless of how data were categorized.
• About 40 cents of every food purchase dollar
was spent on basic items like meat, fruits,
vegetables, milk, eggs, and bread.
• Another 20 cents was spent on sweetened
drinks, desserts, salty snacks, candy, and sugar. <——Not just sugary drinks.
• The remaining 40 cents was spent on a variety of
items such as cereal, prepared foods, other dairy
products, rice, beans, and other cooking
ingredients.”
Those welfare cheats with their meat, fruits,
vegetables, milk, eggs, and bread and rice and beans!
They were really good at commenting they assembler code! Surprising for such young dudes on a deadline.
“Bill and Paul lied.”
Somethings would stay the same….
In 1976 I arranged for bill and Paul to come to NCR to discuss installing their basic on ncr’s(national cash register Dayton Ohio) 7200 (display/processor, detachable kb, monstrous floppy, cassette tape). Bill could not attend.
We asked Paul how they developed that sw: Paul said they worked for a company and when they left they took a copy.
We hired them and had ms basic on our NCR “PC” 7200 in 1976, for 15,000$.
An insider leaked that MS is planning to have windows38 be a RC, with a possibility of windows40 being an actuall released final [non-beta].
But don’t trust what you read on the internet, it’s probably not true. And besides, we all know they’d ruin it again with an ‘update’ anyway.