4 ms·

Fads have always come and gone. C was already 20 years old in the 90s so it was a fair target for hating in favour of something newer and shinier.

pjmlp 8y ago
In the early 90's C was still hardly a thing outside the UNIX computer lab. Mainframes were written in a mix of Assembly and safe system languages (IBM i, z and Unysis ClearPath are the survivors). 8 and 16 bit home micros OSes were largely written in Assembly, and all system languages were in equal footing as platform guests.
- jasode 8y ago
  >In the early 90's C was still hardly a thing outside the UNIX computer lab. That's not what I remembered. Back in 1989, I bought the very popular Microsoft C 5.1 compiler (in shrinkwrapped box) from the Egghead retail store. Egghead was basically a smaller version of CompUSA. Also, non-UNIX publications like PC Magazine and BYTE had ads for Borland Turbo C. Watcom C was also a competitor. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, if one wanted to write COTS software for DOS on IBM PC compatibles, it was either assembly or C Language. Other languages like dBASE/Clipper/4GL were for LOB apps instead of COTS. In 1985, both Lotus 123 v3 and MS Excel were written using C. It was more like the early 1980s before the personal computer revolution when the C Language was mostly tied to UNIX.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    It was very regional. Back in the Iberian Penisula, Turbo Basic, Turbo Pascal, TASM, NASM reigned on the PC for COTS. Amiga demoscene was all about AMOS and 68000 Assembly. I code since 1986, touched my very first C compiler in 1992. By then I already had used Timex 2068 Basic, 48+ Basic, CP/M on +3 A, Z80, Turbo Basic, Forth, Turbo Pascal 3 - 6, Dbase III Plus, 8086 with TASM. Thankfully also in 1992, I got hold of Turbo C++ 1.0, and I was settled on my opinion about C.

4 ms·

Fads have always come and gone. C was already 20 years old in the 90s so it was a fair target for hating in favour of something newer and shinier.

by ChrisRR 8y ago

pjmlp 8y ago
In the early 90's C was still hardly a thing outside the UNIX computer lab. Mainframes were written in a mix of Assembly and safe system languages (IBM i, z and Unysis ClearPath are the survivors). 8 and 16 bit home micros OSes were largely written in Assembly, and all system languages were in equal footing as platform guests.
- jasode 8y ago
  >In the early 90's C was still hardly a thing outside the UNIX computer lab. That's not what I remembered. Back in 1989, I bought the very popular Microsoft C 5.1 compiler (in shrinkwrapped box) from the Egghead retail store. Egghead was basically a smaller version of CompUSA. Also, non-UNIX publications like PC Magazine and BYTE had ads for Borland Turbo C. Watcom C was also a competitor. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, if one wanted to write COTS software for DOS on IBM PC compatibles, it was either assembly or C Language. Other languages like dBASE/Clipper/4GL were for LOB apps instead of COTS. In 1985, both Lotus 123 v3 and MS Excel were written using C. It was more like the early 1980s before the personal computer revolution when the C Language was mostly tied to UNIX.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    It was very regional. Back in the Iberian Penisula, Turbo Basic, Turbo Pascal, TASM, NASM reigned on the PC for COTS. Amiga demoscene was all about AMOS and 68000 Assembly. I code since 1986, touched my very first C compiler in 1992. By then I already had used Timex 2068 Basic, 48+ Basic, CP/M on +3 A, Z80, Turbo Basic, Forth, Turbo Pascal 3 - 6, Dbase III Plus, 8086 with TASM. Thankfully also in 1992, I got hold of Turbo C++ 1.0, and I was settled on my opinion about C.