BASIC was not just a programming language

ROM-based machines and “booting”

• 8‑bit systems like the Amstrad CPC, C64, and others had OS and BASIC in ROM, so they appeared “instant-on,” going from power-up to BASIC prompt in under a second.
• Some argue these machines technically didn’t “boot” since no OS was loaded from external media; others counter that hardware init and environment setup still constitute booting.
• Examples given of variations: Sharp “clean computers” that only had a monitor in ROM; Amstrad PCW booting from floppy; add‑on disk systems (e.g., DDI‑1) layering AMSDOS and CP/M.

BASIC as environment and learning tool

• BASIC on home computers functioned as an integrated environment: editor, interpreter, OS hooks, and often direct hardware access.
• Users recall learning from manuals, magazines, and typing listings, seeing it as an approachable way into programming and understanding the whole machine.
• The ability to move the cursor around the screen, edit in place, and re‑run lines made it more than a simple REPL on many systems.

Comparisons with JavaScript and modern platforms

• Some argue modern JavaScript in a browser console is strictly more powerful and convenient than 8‑bit BASIC (graphics, UI elements, sharing via links, vast free resources).
• Others note that JS is less “discoverable” because you must navigate browsers and dev tools, whereas the BASIC prompt was the default UI.
• Browsers are praised as remarkably stable platforms over time, though build‑tool bitrot is a frustration.

Dijkstra’s BASIC criticism and language evolution

• The famous “BASIC causes brain damage” line is heavily discussed.
• Several comments stress it was aimed at very early, extremely limited BASIC dialects and was part of a broader, humorous critique of many languages.
• Many doubt it “killed” BASIC, pointing out BASIC’s later popularity and evolution (structured BASIC, Visual Basic, VB.NET).
• Some feel tools shape thinking, but also reject the idea that early exposure to BASIC permanently harms programmers.

Line numbers and RENUM

• RENUM/RENUMBER commands existed on many but not all BASICs (e.g., Amstrad CPC, BBC Micro, C128, some Microsoft BASICs, various Eastern bloc and CP/M systems).
• Behavior varied: configurable start and step sizes, 16‑bit or signed‑int limits, and sometimes quirky wrapping or broken GOTO renumbering at high line numbers.
• Several popular 8‑bit machines (C64, Apple II, Atari 800 with built‑in BASIC) lacked RENUM, which made manual line management tedious.

Performance, stacks, and low-level control

• BASIC is frequently criticized for poor performance compared with assembly, Pascal, or Forth on 8‑bit hardware.
• A common pattern was to use BASIC as a high‑level script/driver, delegating heavy work to machine‑language routines—likened to modern Python calling C.
• Discussion of GOSUB/RETURN shows that many BASICs had real call stacks, supported nesting and even recursion, with stack overflow producing “formula too complex” or “memory full” errors.
• Forth is mentioned as an alternate “OS‑like” environment with editors and multitaskers, though its postfix syntax was seen as less approachable.

Nostalgia, education, and modern echoes

• Several commenters credit BASIC (on C64, MSX, CPC, ZX Spectrum, etc.) with sparking lifelong interest in programming.
• There is debate over whether platforms like Raspberry Pi should drop straight into a BASIC‑like environment; today they typically ship with Python and IDEs instead.
• Some lament today’s abstraction layers and feeling of distance from the hardware, while others celebrate cross‑platform reach (JS, WebAssembly) as a different kind of empowerment.
• A recurring wish: a modern BASIC computer with direct hardware access plus updated features like internet support.