4 ms·
They're lumped in the same group by measure of being from the same source and following mostly the same core dialect. What I (and is usually) referred to as "Mi
by deaddodo 2y ago
They're lumped in the same group by measure of being from the same source and following mostly the same core dialect. What I (and is usually) referred to as "Microsoft BASIC", not a specific product:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_BASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_BASIC
E.g.:
> Applesoft BASIC is a dialect of Microsoft BASIC
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applesoft_BASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applesoft_BASIC
> Type Microsoft BASIC
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Basic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Basic
> Type Microsoft BASIC
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickBASIC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickBASIC
The point wasn't that they are they same, in fact quite the opposite. So it would make sense that some variants (the Amiga variant, in this case) could be good while others are less well received.
- hnlmorg 2y agoI’m familiar with the different variants of Microsoft BASIC. What I’m saying is that QBasic isn’t the same product as what Microsoft sold to 3rd parties like Altar, Apple, Commodore and co. So it doesn’t really make sense to discuss QBasic in that context despite it technically still being a dialect of BASIC written by Microsoft.