Amazing how the UI has become prettier, but the underlying concepts hasn't changed at all in 30 years. Huge testament to how well these concepts were designed
I do not agree. There was still some development ongoing. For example, from a developer's point of view, the user interface got separated into code and a description language that describes where you want your buttons to be. You no longer add that directly into your code. This allows the appearance and arrangement of the GUI elements to be done by designers, eliminating the need for a programmer for this work.
Far from it, large enterprises don’t like to move very often they stick with what they know, a large amount of developers hate object oriented programming as well as sql databases, this has slowly started to shift, but it’s hard to push enterprise to shift what is working
Can we all just appreciate how instantly the NeXT system opened its program modules? Good luck getting Xcode to do anything even remotely that instantaneous. We have systems that are thousands of times more powerful, but we're hobbled by the software layer in ways that people have forgotten. Just watch shows like this to see what we used to have, then ponder, "Why aren't things *1000x better* now?"
Hell I'd just like there be a 'first responder' so that when you click on a window it HAS to come to front as it did under the Display Postscript model. MacOS is kinda broken... the model was polluted by Apple engineers who were y'know... capable but ignorant.
"Can we all just appreciate..." Where in the world did that awful click-bait phrase come from? Why not just state your own opinion rather than trying to appeal to the masses?
All of these languages from 30 years ago are still better than javascript is today. You can also do a simple app with way less bullshit than you need for all the modern crap with JS.
@@RonJohn63 You mean when the kid talks at 6:10? I think when they show the guy staring at his keyboard, he was just too confused of what the kid was explaining. 😂
This one cracked me up too. xD I was like "what? XD" What about the hundreds of extra features implemented in a word processing environment? Standard and complex formatting, print previewing, page layout, spellchecking, dictionaries and thesaurus, document metadata, attachments and inline media, format interoperability and backwards compatibility, support documentation and tutorials, tables, drag and drop support, spreadsheet implementations, ------------------
Michael Compton Word processing wasn't that complex back then. The basic features of a word processor are included in Notepad. A high quality word processor of that time (1987-1994) would be comparable to modern versions of Wordpad.
NeXT had a demo where they really did demo a capable NSText object that provided most of the functionality people needed for a word processor. Lesser companies tried to play off that demo... but had lesser tools. It was a sad time... except for NeXT, which was awesome.
I'm gonna watch every one of these CC episodes, as I did 'in the day'. I programmed on multiple platforms for the DoD/USAF and for a large manufacturing company, and then for a small specialty software firm, in good old ANSI C, even for Windows programs (because in early days, that's all there was!). We ended up with bits on mainframes, minis, micro database servers, and desktops (370s/PDP-11/Alpha/etc.) I wrote tools to read resource files and make code outlines for Windows (where, as we liked to say, it took 100 lines of Windows code to equal one line of console code!) I'm so happy I'm retired (though I do code just for fun nowadays, keep the brain going!) We did one inventory database program in Borland ObjectVision, but it turned out that you had to write much more code that was intimated when you bought the product. We converted it to a clean C version, that looked sort of identical, and was about five times quicker in operation.
I think the problem is, computers are so different now, a show like this would never work now but it's always fun to look back. But I'd never want anyone to take away my i7 :)
Well... the times have changed. Why to watch TV at all if there is a fast Internet? Many interesting talks and presentations are there. Honestly, I feel no need for TV these days. Maybe some news channels but most shows seem to be directed at people without sane interests or 50+ housewives.
+TheHabitman I didn't had TV since 2003.This month I got the 200 mbit cable so ye.. TV comes with it.. Its amazing how the freaking commerials are even longer then the movie or serie is. And the stunning part.. STILL someof the adds are still the same ! AHHHH. I hate tv still.
OOP forces you to careful plan your unreadable mess in advance, rather than having it arise spontaneously. It includes advanced features like "inheritance" to aid incomprehensibility.
0:42 "This is not your father's Oldsmobile. This is the new generation of programming tools, environments, and languages." Nicely done Stewart. In case you're too young to remember, the above is a reference to an ad campaign during that time: ruclips.net/video/UFVg7YnqS1Q/видео.html
The natural state of technology and knowledge is to degrade, not to improve. I agree that we have gone through many two steps forwards one step back for programming. A lot of it has to to with the accessibility of it. Pros and cons like anything
Boy that brings back memories I used to program applications for college in Actor back in the 90s! Since I worked for Borland for 4 years in the 90s it was good to see Phillip Khan in this video!
So that was where, Jobs posited, desktop computing would go next. I'd run with the one that the company was what Steve Jobs did next after getting ousted from Apple. Just to make things sound goofy, Apple ended up getting Unix-y when they reinstalled Jobs, apparently buying NeXT in the deal.
@@jazzlover10000 It's interesting to guess at where NeXT might have gotten if the company had skipped the hardware (nice as it was) and started out as a pure software company, targeting PCs say. As much as I detest PCs and love (still) 680x0, the Next machines were bloody expensive.
That's how it was for me as well in '96. We started with C++ mainly doing procedural and then started OOP. First we do a lot of UML and then translated that to code. We also were taught Fortran, COBOL and a few other languages. One of the few things from college that actually is still a core skill that I use at times.
Turbo Pascal , When I was studying at University it was so popular that everyone believed that it will be the future of programming... it was actually how pitty it lost its popularity
That used to happen a lot. Smalltalk was kewl but not really suited to the processors of the time. I liked Newtonscript, which had dynamic inheritance. Also Objective-C 1.0, which really was a full-on professional product that any system could have used, but didn't. I think the NeXT system was the only place where OO really succeeded. Everything else has been a slow-roll failure.
You can define your own types in C-standard via struct, union or enum as well. Granted, you cannot have a function declaration within a struct, but it still is a new data type
birinci papajanpol um, you can't :-/ if you define a function in struct or union, you are working in C++. it certainly isn't by standard and C compilers will give an error when compiling that file.
A function declaration in a struct? That is silly. I'm not even sure why people declare and define a member function in a C++ class declaration. Put the declaration in the class. Implement the function in a separate cpp file.
This is super cool. I started programming around this time, and I don't think I realized Object-C existed back then. I only became aware of it through the iPhone.
I was aware of the name but I had no idea what the code looked like. I thought it was something like C++. When I wanted to code for the iphones many years ago, I looked into Objective C since that is what Apple's had as a compiler. Wow, what an ugly language.
I Still install OS/2 & OS/2 Warp on many systems and am Lucky to have most all of these Programming Languages in OEM forum , most are still available for DL but might be shareware , I like finding all original packaging , I also like enhancing my DOS System beforehand , Great Show Thanks for Uploading :) QC
Well you can't win against free compilers and a competitor like Microsoft who has several cash cows that allows to be independent of the financial success of their IDE and compilers. It's obvious that Borland didn't have a chance on the long run.
I used the Borland OWL framework and C++ on a large corporate project for almost 2 years. It was much easier to get a complex window up and running than using Windows MFC. I never really understood OOP concepts until I had to interface with existing UI classes and "inherit" a working UI framework.
True. OO turned into a dead-end tho' it worked kinda ok in Objective-C. Was a mess under C++, Java and others. I like what golang has done with OO... namely to have seriously sidelined it yet advance the obviously useful parts of OO in a background manner.
And later on Turbo Pascal became Object Pascal in which they wrote the IDE Delphi, the best tool for writing Window's applications. There is a free Delphi-like application tool named Lazarus that I use all the time.
TurboC was just a bit nicer. Microsoft C was more powerful tho'. I think I really hated the Borland Make utility... it needed work. I had to use both coz our instructors would not allow C programs to be submitted in class. Only Pascal.
It seems kinda weird to think that this was something new back then. That people had to reach to that conclusion which now seems so “duh!” Obviously obvious. I remember reading a module in my Polish-written Turbo Pascal bible, explaining OOP in Turbo Vision. Anyone remembers that? I was in 8th grade I believe. That would be 14-15 yo. I remember that feeling of almost getting it. Feeling it’s easy, but having this strange doubt in the back of my head. I never tried it because I got my pentium 200mmx and could play games unfortunately
90s - "and we can build code and apps without knowing how to code. Programming jobs will be gone in, I'd say five to 10 years" . 30 years later "We need more programmers!!! Do you know how to code?"
21:10 As if this was something new in 1990. Universities were teaching encapsulation and eliminating side-effects to *COBOL* students in 1980 and Pascal students in 1975. Hell, it's why Structured Programming was invented in the first place!!!
By the year 1995 Microsoft introduced the Visual programming studio series of languages. They included: Visual BASIC, Visual Logo, Visual C++, Visual Assembler/Editor, Visual Pascal (et cetera). Of course these were all upgraded versions of their original Microsoft versions and one would have to buy the new full languages in order to write your own functional programs.
Is this the only Computer Chronicles episode featuring NeXT? It's interesting to see Interface Builder and Objective-C, which of course eventually morphed into Xcode and Swift.
@@jazzlover10000 I took a class on iphone programming. it was nice learning Swift and the UI designer. Swift was like a simplified version of C++. C++ has way too excessive features that I don't use like class inheritance, polymorphism. The only think missing was that Swift does not have a separate header and cpp file. You have to insert all the code into the same file, inside the class declaration. The GUI designer was sensitive. It was easy to mess up and break things. Fixing it back is not easy. It is better to start fresh.
C is still the predominant systems language while C++ is the only one of these technologies which has survived, thrived, and continuously evolved 33 years on from this show.
Objective-C and NeXTStep's technology are still around today and bigger than ever. NeXTStep became the foundation for OS X, iOS, and all the other modern Apple operating systems. Indeed, when you build iOS applications today you're still usually interacting with the NS foundation classes.
25:16 Why not KERMIT? One of the early highly-regarded open-source projects, with implementations of a common file-transfer protocol available for just about every platform under the sun -- for free! (Yes, I was using it to move files between disparate micros as part of my user-support job back then.)
Watching this, I'm confused by how they are presenting object oriented languages through this development and demonstration of graphical apps. I'm wondering if that has to do with a fundamental misunderstanding (like the guy in the middle talked about), or this is how people of the day started thinking about OOP, or this comes from the constraint of how they want to present something visual for the TV program. In my mind, OOP is all about defining an interface and building modular programs that build on other interfaces or implement a new interface...but at the end of the day, programming around an intended interface vs an intended implementation. I see that carry through into today's world of programs inter-operating through data exchange, REST APIs and the like. But OOP as a text box that you can throw around the screen or as a graphic that you can move to another part of the screen, I don't get that... And no one today would ever think of PowerPoint or other graphics and text editors in terms of the programming objects they represent. In this video, a pie chart is a programmable object that you can manipulate. But if you use PowerPoint, a pie chart is a pie chart. There is a complete distinction between the graphical object and the programming object, and the goal of user interfaces today is to make it as little like programming as possible vs with the tools presented here it was about making the programming of user interfaces easier. It's interesting to see this hype though around this new form a programming, it sounds like it was a fundamental shift in programming practice of the day but it's ubiquitous in how programming is taught now a days. It's interesting as well that there was this hype and push into OOP, but now it is kind of overrated, or it's not always the best tool for the job. Like Go doesn't have objects, but does support programming around interfaces. And programming in Java is like the absurd conclusion of OOP gone wild, extremely verbose and sometimes unwieldy. If you just need a for loop and a few print statements, why build a class that implements that behavior vs a single function procedure that does what you need...
Newtonscript was a lot of fun, visually in terms of UI as it had dynamic inheritance... the UI objects could change their object types on the fly! Could have yielded us a great replacement to Interface Builder at the time. Was at least y'know... in the ballpark.
Lol.. they're literally telling you. GUI's and OOP were developed together. People realized that graphics were built out of fundamental building blocks-- lines, boxes, windows, etc. Go watch some Alan Kay talks.
They were trying to push this OOP bullshit in the early 90s, but still C remained the minimalistic and beautiful language that was wildly used for creating productive software and even games in the 90s. C is still the most powerful tool for the programmer.
"bullshit"? Yet Java came out ~20years after C and took the world by storm. Up til very recently it was by FAR the most popular, widely-used PL on the planet. It's still in the top2, if not still #1. Hey, I love C, too. And I'm NOT a Java fanboy, but I wouldn't go hating on what OOP has done for languages over the last few decades.
also , "most powerful tool for the programmer"..... needs to be taken in context (or your specific definition of 'most powerful'). For systems programming? Very small-scale embedded systems or modern computer operating systems and AAA game engines - yea, probably. Most powerful tool for learning and for quickly and easily coming up with high-level programs for the web, data science, maths, maybe not so much (cough::Python::cough).
@@intuit13 C has been around for ages. You can still program in C on Amiga or MS-DOS, you can build on Quake engine, you can build modern tools -- it is still wildly used. I am not claiming that C should be used for everything but if you want to learn just one language and learn it good then C is probably your best candidate. You can easily pick up other languages later.
@@ghost_mall next time try harder with reading skills moron. I said: you can build old stuff but also modern stuff. C is still wildly used everywhere: from Linux kernel to your favorite proxy software (nginx) to NASA space software... It is still literally everywhere. Now try that with your javascript kid...
@@spearPYNunless you want to program to more newer devices (Windows based, Linux based, Android based, or MacOS/iOS based) then you need to learn other languages Kotlin, Java, Obj-C, Xcode, C# which are all OOP most of the time, with exception of Python (which can be either OOP, PP, FP, or SP)
@@ghost_mall yes I know, but programmers inly started considering to adopt it in the 90's when GUI becomes mainstream. Even I didn't know about it until I used MFC.
11:28 "We're about half-way to a word processor here." What I would love is if all of the apps I use which have multi-line text edit box widgets would just run an instance of my favorite text editor (like Vim or Emacs) to edit text inline, rather than providing it's own limited text editing logic. 30 years after this episode airs, and not a single widget toolkit in common use today provides this obvious functionality.
3:20 this woman has a strange way of speaking and moving her lips 14:04 The guy next to the man who speaks looks like he swallowed a little too many sedatives 🤭
Visual programming is still (2018) not the same like typing a program and not even faster to do and it is limited. It is a dream that doesn't come true. Imagion that every possible situation, language construction must be translated to it's visual version, every part of it. It is like translate a (spoken) sentence into a single image or visaversa. You need so many steps to describe what you want to do, at the end it doesn't make it easier and in case you want to change a part it is even more painful. Typing is much faster and more accurate. For example, Microsoft MakeCode (blocks) is such example, nice but very limited and less compact, need more editor space to design. You can't even make functions so you will end up with a large soup of 'code', not usable to write maintable programs. If you want to learn a language, everyone can write (type), type it like a language, forget visual. This video shows us, it started decades ago and it is still not doable for serious projects, waste of time. It is a dream that doesn't come true, the time line proves it.
At 1:56 that's more complicated than assembly language, may as well type in C. At 24:50 I wonder if the viewer managed to copy their files from the desktop to laptop using Dr. John's advise ? I guess the file transfer process should be about half way finished now. 😂
Just tgot an HP 712 workstation running NeXTStep recently. It is a really great machine... much nicer than the NeXTStation Mono Turbo, which is the machine I had that had decent performance in 1992. It's really nice to have a decent copy of Interface Builder again, as Apple kinda ruined it.
Microsoft had a very nice version of C at that time, but Borland C was better coz the company gave newcomers a few support questions after buying the product. Mine was, "how do you allocate 1 megabyte of RAM?" They sent me a letter explaining how to do it. Good show, Borland!
Maybe they mean with these words a programming language that is meant for the none professional programmer. A programming language like Python today or (Visual) Basic in the early days.
On the one hand I love watching these old videos of my computing heyday and exiting promise of OOP.. on the other hand.. what a pile of shit most of OOP turned out to be. A grand mythology of dubious benefit.
@@kaustubhken C++ is a standardized programming language invented by Bjarne Stroustrup. Zortech C++ was a compiler to compile C++ code into machine code and created by Walter Bright. Zortech was renamed to Digital Mars. The language that Walter Bright invented was D. At that time typical competitors in that field of C++ compilers were Watcom C(++), Borland's Turbo C++ and Microsoft C(++). Most started as C compilers, but some compilers could already compile C++ code. That's why i put the ++ in brackets. Later most compilers were renamed to better express that they're capable to compile C++ code.
Amazing how the UI has become prettier, but the underlying concepts hasn't changed at all in 30 years. Huge testament to how well these concepts were designed
Or how unimaginative developers have become !
I do not agree. There was still some development ongoing. For example, from a developer's point of view, the user interface got separated into code and a description language that describes where you want your buttons to be. You no longer add that directly into your code. This allows the appearance and arrangement of the GUI elements to be done by designers, eliminating the need for a programmer for this work.
Far from it, large enterprises don’t like to move very often they stick with what they know, a large amount of developers hate object oriented programming as well as sql databases, this has slowly started to shift, but it’s hard to push enterprise to shift what is working
@@OpenGL4ever LOL that is just a cycle that repeats. Now developers are once again completely mixing code and UI with stuff like React.
@@elgoog-the-thirdi hVe noo idea what you NERDS AND GEEKS are blabbering about LAUGHING OUTING LOUDING
I've learned more about OOP just by watching this than stuff they put out these days, best way of learning programming is going back to basics
Lincoln TeKnO This is true... :)
Lincoln TeKnO Programmig nowadays is complex and boring... back in the 80s it was simple and fun.
Best way to learn anything is go back to basics
There you go: ruclips.net/video/WYPNjSoDrqw/видео.html
@@spearPYN Until you realised that BASIC was too slow for anything useful and you had to figure out how to write Machine Code.
That IBM keyboard typing is a symphony to my ears
Clack clack CLACK. Clack clack!
You might also like: "The Typewriter Song" !
this absolute savage writing smalltalk in a variable width font through glasses thicker than my desk.
Can we all just appreciate how instantly the NeXT system opened its program modules? Good luck getting Xcode to do anything even remotely that instantaneous. We have systems that are thousands of times more powerful, but we're hobbled by the software layer in ways that people have forgotten. Just watch shows like this to see what we used to have, then ponder, "Why aren't things *1000x better* now?"
Mac OS / OS X is indeed a compromise compared to NeXTStep.
Maybe we should write code directly in binary 😳
Hell I'd just like there be a 'first responder' so that when you click on a window it HAS to come to front as it did under the Display Postscript model.
MacOS is kinda broken... the model was polluted by Apple engineers who were y'know... capable but ignorant.
"Can we all just appreciate..." Where in the world did that awful click-bait phrase come from? Why not just state your own opinion rather than trying to appeal to the masses?
@@atlantic_love "click-bait phrase" Yep, I'm in it for those delicious clicks; you found me out!
All of these languages from 30 years ago are still better than javascript is today. You can also do a simple app with way less bullshit than you need for all the modern crap with JS.
No.
Using node.js for backend software is like using skateboard for moving freight - it works as long as you install 3,000 plugins.
Triggered.
We suffer counting everyday the amount of JS frameworks. We don't even need those
@@alexandersuvorov2002 Yes so true.
I like when the other guy's talking, the guy close to the computer keep staring at his keyboard
I think he's got a neck problem.
@@RonJohn63 You mean when the kid talks at 6:10? I think when they show the guy staring at his keyboard, he was just too confused of what the kid was explaining. 😂
@@Snappers1_ I was referring to George Bosworth of Digitalk at 11:08.
everyone nervous on tv
11:28 - 11:43 - "we're about half way to word processor" after opening a plain editbox
This one cracked me up too. xD I was like "what? XD" What about the hundreds of extra features implemented in a word processing environment? Standard and complex formatting, print previewing, page layout, spellchecking, dictionaries and thesaurus, document metadata, attachments and inline media, format interoperability and backwards compatibility, support documentation and tutorials, tables, drag and drop support, spreadsheet implementations, ------------------
Michael Compton
Word processing wasn't that complex back then. The basic features of a word processor are included in Notepad. A high quality word processor of that time (1987-1994) would be comparable to modern versions of Wordpad.
send it through LaTeX 😂
@@anonUK Not so sure about that, Wordperfect 5.1 was pretty advanced. Lots and lots and lots of shortcuts to learn...
NeXT had a demo where they really did demo a capable NSText object that provided most of the functionality people needed for a word processor.
Lesser companies tried to play off that demo... but had lesser tools. It was a sad time... except for NeXT, which was awesome.
I'm gonna watch every one of these CC episodes, as I did 'in the day'.
I programmed on multiple platforms for the DoD/USAF and for a large manufacturing company, and then for a small specialty software firm, in good old ANSI C, even for Windows programs (because in early days, that's all there was!). We ended up with bits on mainframes, minis, micro database servers, and desktops (370s/PDP-11/Alpha/etc.) I wrote tools to read resource files and make code outlines for Windows (where, as we liked to say, it took 100 lines of Windows code to equal one line of console code!) I'm so happy I'm retired (though I do code just for fun nowadays, keep the brain going!)
We did one inventory database program in Borland ObjectVision, but it turned out that you had to write much more code that was intimated when you bought the product. We converted it to a clean C version, that looked sort of identical, and was about five times quicker in operation.
Man, I wish a show of this caliber was still on the air today. Nothing but reality TV drivel, even from once reputable channels. Fuck society.
I think the problem is, computers are so different now, a show like this would never work now but it's always fun to look back. But I'd never want anyone to take away my i7 :)
Well... the times have changed. Why to watch TV at all if there is a fast Internet? Many interesting talks and presentations are there. Honestly, I feel no need for TV these days. Maybe some news channels but most shows seem to be directed at people without sane interests or 50+ housewives.
+TheHabitman
It would be called Smartphone Chronicles: Stupid Pointless Shit You Can Do With Your Phone.
+TheHabitman I didn't had TV since 2003.This month I got the 200 mbit cable so ye.. TV comes with it..
Its amazing how the freaking commerials are even longer then the movie or serie is.
And the stunning part.. STILL someof the adds are still the same ! AHHHH. I hate tv still.
+Adam Kopcinski (Adam Monroe) (or tablet) :)
OOP forces you to careful plan your unreadable mess in advance, rather than having it arise spontaneously. It includes advanced features like "inheritance" to aid incomprehensibility.
0:42
"This is not your father's Oldsmobile. This is the new generation of programming tools, environments, and languages."
Nicely done Stewart.
In case you're too young to remember, the above is a reference to an ad campaign during that time: ruclips.net/video/UFVg7YnqS1Q/видео.html
It's nice to see how far we've come!
in some areas of programming we went backward though
The natural state of technology and knowledge is to degrade, not to improve. I agree that we have gone through many two steps forwards one step back for programming. A lot of it has to to with the accessibility of it. Pros and cons like anything
This is my son's favorite TV show.
Boy that brings back memories I used to program applications for college in Actor back in the 90s! Since I worked for Borland for 4 years in the 90s it was good to see Phillip Khan in this video!
He looks luke a tramp )))
I like the way presenters wear ties because we talk about serious stuff here
They were representing their companies, of course they're going to wear ties. lmao.
@@maxxdahl6062 In the mid-2000s, it would have been a turtleneck sweater, and now, a pair of torn up jeans.
Hard to believe that shows like this played on TV. It's too technical for today's celeb obsessed TV shows
Watching this I finally understand how far ahead NeXT was compared to the competition.
So that was where, Jobs posited, desktop computing would go next. I'd run with the one that the company was what Steve Jobs did next after getting ousted from Apple. Just to make things sound goofy, Apple ended up getting Unix-y when they reinstalled Jobs, apparently buying NeXT in the deal.
Those of using NeXTStep literally had a 10 year advantage over our competitors. It was crazy.
@@jazzlover10000 It's interesting to guess at where NeXT might have gotten if the company had skipped the hardware (nice as it was) and started out as a pure software company, targeting PCs say. As much as I detest PCs and love (still) 680x0, the Next machines were bloody expensive.
I went to university in 1994 and we still learned functional program languages first and OOP languages second
That's how it was for me as well in '96. We started with C++ mainly doing procedural and then started OOP. First we do a lot of UML and then translated that to code. We also were taught Fortran, COBOL and a few other languages. One of the few things from college that actually is still a core skill that I use at times.
Turbo Pascal , When I was studying at University it was so popular that everyone believed that it will be the future of programming... it was actually how pitty it lost its popularity
Smalltalk: what a great language.
Also, was the Objective-C bloke trying not to laugh during the C++ demo?
That used to happen a lot. Smalltalk was kewl but not really suited to the processors of the time.
I liked Newtonscript, which had dynamic inheritance.
Also Objective-C 1.0, which really was a full-on professional product that any system could have used, but didn't.
I think the NeXT system was the only place where OO really succeeded. Everything else has been a slow-roll failure.
You can define your own types in C-standard via struct, union or enum as well. Granted, you cannot have a function declaration within a struct, but it still is a new data type
no. i can.
birinci papajanpol um, you can't :-/ if you define a function in struct or union, you are working in C++. it certainly isn't by standard and C compilers will give an error when compiling that file.
Ivan Bažulić You can create a pointer to a function within a struct and get essentially the same thing.
A function declaration in a struct? That is silly.
I'm not even sure why people declare and define a member function in a C++ class declaration.
Put the declaration in the class. Implement the function in a separate cpp file.
This is super cool. I started programming around this time, and I don't think I realized Object-C existed back then. I only became aware of it through the iPhone.
I was aware of the name but I had no idea what the code looked like. I thought it was something like C++. When I wanted to code for the iphones many years ago, I looked into Objective C since that is what Apple's had as a compiler.
Wow, what an ugly language.
1990: You can create programs without writing code.
31 years later, I write code to make a living.
ChatGPT enters the room.
Great Timothy Leary bit at 26:40, especially love the graphic.
27:32 I wonder if one can still request a transcript of this all these years later.
I Still install OS/2 & OS/2 Warp on many systems and am Lucky to have most all of these Programming Languages in OEM forum , most are still available for DL but might be shareware , I like finding all original packaging , I also like enhancing my DOS System beforehand , Great Show Thanks for Uploading :) QC
lol, I like the name ;)
Oh After Dark.... How I miss you.
Man Borland used to be a huge player in the programming market. Now it's totally dead.
Philippe Kahn dumped Borland for cash and started Starfish, which he dumped on Motorola for cash and started Lightsurf, which he dumped for cash...
Well you can't win against free compilers and a competitor like Microsoft who has several cash cows that allows to be independent of the financial success of their IDE and compilers. It's obvious that Borland didn't have a chance on the long run.
My entire childhood and even now at 35 years old I have wondered about the serial port. Finally have the answer!
I used the Borland OWL framework and C++ on a large corporate project for almost 2 years. It was much easier to get a complex window up and running than using Windows MFC. I never really understood OOP concepts until I had to interface with existing UI classes and "inherit" a working UI framework.
True. OO turned into a dead-end tho' it worked kinda ok in Objective-C. Was a mess under C++, Java and others. I like what golang has done with OO... namely to have seriously sidelined it yet advance the obviously useful parts of OO in a background manner.
21:54 .... so is that how you convert c program to c++ program....
Turbo Pascal with its IDE was such an awesome tool back in the day to quickly develop and compile to a final binanry.
And later on Turbo Pascal became Object Pascal in which they wrote the IDE Delphi, the best tool for writing Window's applications. There is a free Delphi-like application tool named Lazarus that I use all the time.
TurboC was just a bit nicer. Microsoft C was more powerful tho'. I think I really hated the Borland Make utility... it needed work. I had to use both coz our instructors would not allow C programs to be submitted in class. Only Pascal.
@@jazzlover10000 Only used Turbo C a few times, but yeah make was a turn off. I just loved how one keypress in Turbo Pascal and you get a executable.
A virtual field trip, thanks!
Lol, the guy @ 8:00 talks to them like he's being told off by his parents.
It seems kinda weird to think that this was something new back then. That people had to reach to that conclusion which now seems so “duh!” Obviously obvious. I remember reading a module in my Polish-written Turbo Pascal bible, explaining OOP in Turbo Vision. Anyone remembers that? I was in 8th grade I believe. That would be 14-15 yo. I remember that feeling of almost getting it. Feeling it’s easy, but having this strange doubt in the back of my head. I never tried it because I got my pentium 200mmx and could play games unfortunately
90s - "and we can build code and apps without knowing how to code. Programming jobs will be gone in, I'd say five to 10 years" . 30 years later "We need more programmers!!! Do you know how to code?"
Today there is ChatGPT.
Actor...that brings back memories...so many of these ideas didn't survive...nowadays, most OOP code isn't reused or extended.
borland rip
21:10 As if this was something new in 1990. Universities were teaching encapsulation and eliminating side-effects to *COBOL* students in 1980 and Pascal students in 1975. Hell, it's why Structured Programming was invented in the first place!!!
Computers: Better Than Drugs
Calls to mind a science-fiction novel involving a drug called "Tek"
*_It even has scrolling..._** OMG!*
By the year 1995 Microsoft introduced the Visual programming studio series of languages. They included: Visual BASIC, Visual Logo, Visual C++, Visual Assembler/Editor, Visual Pascal (et cetera). Of course these were all upgraded versions of their original Microsoft versions and one would have to buy the new full languages in order to write your own functional programs.
Is this the only Computer Chronicles episode featuring NeXT? It's interesting to see Interface Builder and Objective-C, which of course eventually morphed into Xcode and Swift.
Interface Builder sorta morphed into Project Builder, which then devolved into XCode. ProjectBuilder was great... I wish Linux had it.
@@jazzlover10000 I took a class on iphone programming. it was nice learning Swift and the UI designer.
Swift was like a simplified version of C++.
C++ has way too excessive features that I don't use like class inheritance, polymorphism.
The only think missing was that Swift does not have a separate header and cpp file. You have to insert all the code into the same file, inside the class declaration.
The GUI designer was sensitive. It was easy to mess up and break things. Fixing it back is not easy. It is better to start fresh.
0:30 I wish Stewart Cheifet would randomly show up on my desk and narrate my PC activities to an invisible audience.
C is still the predominant systems language while C++ is the only one of these technologies which has survived, thrived, and continuously evolved 33 years on from this show.
Objective-C and NeXTStep's technology are still around today and bigger than ever. NeXTStep became the foundation for OS X, iOS, and all the other modern Apple operating systems. Indeed, when you build iOS applications today you're still usually interacting with the NS foundation classes.
This aired during my senior year in high school. 🤦🏻♂️
@4:25 I can't believe I saw Philippe Kahn. He is the inventor of the camera phone.
Anyone know where to find the EngLan programming language he was using at the beginning?
Wish I could tell what some of the speakers books in the background are
When a few greedy corporations stifle competition, everyone loses.
"This is a form of demonstration that we would provide to our customers on an as needed basis."
Wow were they working that market lingo
Why do i feel like i was a 90s programmer in my life before? XD
25:16 Why not KERMIT? One of the early highly-regarded open-source projects, with implementations of a common file-transfer protocol available for just about every platform under the sun -- for free!
(Yes, I was using it to move files between disparate micros as part of my user-support job back then.)
Watching this, I'm confused by how they are presenting object oriented languages through this development and demonstration of graphical apps. I'm wondering if that has to do with a fundamental misunderstanding (like the guy in the middle talked about), or this is how people of the day started thinking about OOP, or this comes from the constraint of how they want to present something visual for the TV program. In my mind, OOP is all about defining an interface and building modular programs that build on other interfaces or implement a new interface...but at the end of the day, programming around an intended interface vs an intended implementation. I see that carry through into today's world of programs inter-operating through data exchange, REST APIs and the like. But OOP as a text box that you can throw around the screen or as a graphic that you can move to another part of the screen, I don't get that... And no one today would ever think of PowerPoint or other graphics and text editors in terms of the programming objects they represent. In this video, a pie chart is a programmable object that you can manipulate. But if you use PowerPoint, a pie chart is a pie chart. There is a complete distinction between the graphical object and the programming object, and the goal of user interfaces today is to make it as little like programming as possible vs with the tools presented here it was about making the programming of user interfaces easier. It's interesting to see this hype though around this new form a programming, it sounds like it was a fundamental shift in programming practice of the day but it's ubiquitous in how programming is taught now a days. It's interesting as well that there was this hype and push into OOP, but now it is kind of overrated, or it's not always the best tool for the job. Like Go doesn't have objects, but does support programming around interfaces. And programming in Java is like the absurd conclusion of OOP gone wild, extremely verbose and sometimes unwieldy. If you just need a for loop and a few print statements, why build a class that implements that behavior vs a single function procedure that does what you need...
Newtonscript was a lot of fun, visually in terms of UI as it had dynamic inheritance... the UI objects could change their object types on the fly!
Could have yielded us a great replacement to Interface Builder at the time. Was at least y'know... in the ballpark.
Lol.. they're literally telling you. GUI's and OOP were developed together. People realized that graphics were built out of fundamental building blocks-- lines, boxes, windows, etc.
Go watch some Alan Kay talks.
25:50 - Have a HP Vectra computer with a 486 processor and 2 MB of ram for a price between $10,000 and $20,000.
Who, upon getting a handle on C++ and/or the like, used the groaner, "U down with OOP" ?
Yeah you know me.
They were trying to push this OOP bullshit in the early 90s, but still C remained the minimalistic and beautiful language that was wildly used for creating productive software and even games in the 90s.
C is still the most powerful tool for the programmer.
"bullshit"? Yet Java came out ~20years after C and took the world by storm. Up til very recently it was by FAR the most popular, widely-used PL on the planet. It's still in the top2, if not still #1.
Hey, I love C, too. And I'm NOT a Java fanboy, but I wouldn't go hating on what OOP has done for languages over the last few decades.
also , "most powerful tool for the programmer"..... needs to be taken in context (or your specific definition of 'most powerful'). For systems programming? Very small-scale embedded systems or modern computer operating systems and AAA game engines - yea, probably. Most powerful tool for learning and for quickly and easily coming up with high-level programs for the web, data science, maths, maybe not so much (cough::Python::cough).
@@intuit13 C has been around for ages. You can still program in C on Amiga or MS-DOS, you can build on Quake engine, you can build modern tools -- it is still wildly used. I am not claiming that C should be used for everything but if you want to learn just one language and learn it good then C is probably your best candidate. You can easily pick up other languages later.
@@ghost_mall next time try harder with reading skills moron. I said: you can build old stuff but also modern stuff. C is still wildly used everywhere: from Linux kernel to your favorite proxy software (nginx) to NASA space software... It is still literally everywhere.
Now try that with your javascript kid...
@@spearPYNunless you want to program to more newer devices (Windows based, Linux based, Android based, or MacOS/iOS based) then you need to learn other languages
Kotlin, Java, Obj-C, Xcode, C# which are all OOP most of the time, with exception of Python (which can be either OOP, PP, FP, or SP)
OOP in its infancy
@@ghost_mall yes I know, but programmers inly started considering to adopt it in the 90's when GUI becomes mainstream. Even I didn't know about it until I used MFC.
Purchased Laplink3 but it said 'could not find COM port - is this machine less than 30 years old?'.
11:28 "We're about half-way to a word processor here." What I would love is if all of the apps I use which have multi-line text edit box widgets would just run an instance of my favorite text editor (like Vim or Emacs) to edit text inline, rather than providing it's own limited text editing logic.
30 years after this episode airs, and not a single widget toolkit in common use today provides this obvious functionality.
The guy that demos Smalltalk has glasses so heavy that his head is about to fall forward.
@@evhvariac2 I was at the time this was broadcast. But I saved the comment for the time youtube was invented.
3:20 this woman has a strange way of speaking and moving her lips
14:04 The guy next to the man who speaks looks like he swallowed a little too many sedatives 🤭
Jan is awesome!
She talks like she drank too much coffee.
Visual programming is still (2018) not the same like typing a program and not even faster to do and it is limited. It is a dream that doesn't come true. Imagion that every possible situation, language construction must be translated to it's visual version, every part of it. It is like translate a (spoken) sentence into a single image or visaversa. You need so many steps to describe what you want to do, at the end it doesn't make it easier and in case you want to change a part it is even more painful. Typing is much faster and more accurate.
For example, Microsoft MakeCode (blocks) is such example, nice but very limited and less compact, need more editor space to design. You can't even make functions so you will end up with a large soup of 'code', not usable to write maintable programs.
If you want to learn a language, everyone can write (type), type it like a language, forget visual. This video shows us, it started decades ago and it is still not doable for serious projects, waste of time. It is a dream that doesn't come true, the time line proves it.
Fast forward to 2023. I use chatGpt every day to write code snippets for many oops languages
Fast forward to 2024. Now it's embedded directly into my IDE and codes while I code.
@@SomeDudeInBaltimore in 2025 it may be connected to our brain
I can't wait to be able to purchase stuff on the internet. (sent by me in 1993 to my RUclips account in 2019.)
I first thought "Out of print" OOP
At 1:56 that's more complicated than assembly language, may as well type in C. At 24:50 I wonder if the viewer managed to copy their files from the desktop to laptop using Dr. John's advise ? I guess the file transfer process should be about half way finished now. 😂
This would help to learn BASIC! Except easier!
BASIC is worth learning if for no other reason than it helps de-toxify you from the effects of the OO thought-police!
I always wondered what's so Turbo about it... I still do, to this day
Extremely fast compilation times.
Wow I was just a non-computer super dork back then!
I only got to the Applesoft BASIC
I'm an engineering student prod to watch this
Was exciting times. What happened to Maria Gabriel ?
Just tgot an HP 712 workstation running NeXTStep recently. It is a really great machine... much nicer than the NeXTStation Mono Turbo, which is the machine I had that had decent performance in 1992. It's really nice to have a decent copy of Interface Builder again, as Apple kinda ruined it.
I did a bit of XCode on my iBook G4 and it was still ok then. Looked at it a few years ago and it made me feel jolly sad.
It's all going reactive now
18:25 bro predicted the std::directory_iterator in 1989
damn Pascal..
Indeed. I never respected my college again after they made us learn it.
And all I was learning in my school in 1990 was BASIC
Pascal also, on Apple IIc/IIe machines
Microsoft had a very nice version of C at that time, but Borland C was better coz the company gave newcomers a few support questions after buying the product. Mine was, "how do you allocate 1 megabyte of RAM?" They sent me a letter explaining how to do it. Good show, Borland!
C was the language i wanted to learn and some sort of Turtle BASIC and (Turbo) Pascal was, what they offered in school. :(
"I'm getting dizzy." -Jan Lewis
programming back then :
If
Then
else
end
programming now :
if dont, dont
That was fine. It was when the state-based UI paradigm shipped to support Windows+Mac. Yecch.
The actor presenter, what is his computer? I want to do a research
2020, still the same...
3:00 none of the things she said have anything to do with OOP. Brilliant.
ruclips.net/video/sh8_0BAR-gU/видео.html
16:03 Lies!
Sounded like that hurt: 21:03
Hi! I'm from 2019 and can find fault with everything that's come before.
Hi! I'm from 2059 and can find fault with everything that's come before.
Jan Lewis. The type of person that will stab you in the face and explain to you why it was all your fault.
could someone explain to me what "end user language" is? thanks
Maybe they mean with these words a programming language that is meant for the none professional programmer. A programming language like Python today or (Visual) Basic in the early days.
programming terminology for what you "the end user" speaks
21:27 *Cough* “fragile-base-class problem” *cough*
soon my planet will control all your systems
it's a Unix system! I know this!
On the one hand I love watching these old videos of my computing heyday and exiting promise of OOP.. on the other hand.. what a pile of shit most of OOP turned out to be. A grand mythology of dubious benefit.
Modern OOP is great fucking boomer
@@kaasbaas9532 use what you like. i don't give a flying fuck!
7:50 Mustached guy... suspicious..... Freddy Mercury had a mustache....
25:00 Looks like Steve Wozniak's brother...
for the computer chronicles, i'm Maria Ga......brail?
18:03 C++
TheiLame2 zortech c++ is created by Walter bright
@@kaustubhken C++ is a standardized programming language invented by Bjarne Stroustrup.
Zortech C++ was a compiler to compile C++ code into machine code and created by Walter Bright. Zortech was renamed to Digital Mars. The language that Walter Bright invented was D.
At that time typical competitors in that field of C++ compilers were Watcom C(++), Borland's Turbo C++ and Microsoft C(++). Most started as C compilers, but some compilers could already compile C++ code. That's why i put the ++ in brackets. Later most compilers were renamed to better express that they're capable to compile C++ code.
OOP will never catch-on...
Talking about programming languages with a woman resource. Good Interpretation!
Looking at OOPs!
OOP: the $1000 000 000 000 disaster.