Why should they? Less users are programming anything, but more people have become users of computers in the first place. And we have more users of computers, precisely because the levels of abstraction do not require the ordinary user to program anything. Today’s ordinary user is more “ordinary” than fifty years ago. This development of making a tool or subject more accessible to the layman, by hiding the complexities with abstractions and yet allowing more skilled users to gain advantages by peeling away the abstractions, is present in many different fields throughout the history of mankind.
If you look closely, it is not really surprising. Not even a problem at all. In fact, if you have the simple understanding that maybe somebody doesn’t want to program, not because they are a stupid idiot or a lazy normie consumer, but because they simply don’t give a shit about it, follow other interests and can contribute to the world with other skills, then the observation that most users are not programming anything, is insanely unproblematic.
To be fair, we are at a point where most users will never need to program anything as most needs are already met by existing work. The whole “there’s an app for that” marketing had a lot of truth to it.
It will only get worse with the phone and tablet generation and LLMs.
140 years after the automobile, most drivers can’t or won’t repair their car!
I dunno about this; IME even when it was highly approachable most people didn’t do it. I was around back then, got my first Commodore in '84, and even the Geek / Nerd circles were mostly just for people swapping copies of commercial software. It wasn’t any better when I graduated High School in '91 and even in College almost no one outside of STEM was doing any programming.
It wasn’t and still isn’t a popular activity.
College computer science courses have had to go back to teaching students what computer files and folders are. A lot of computer programs have simplified themselves as ease of use overtook features as a driving factor for use.
Most people don’t know how to program because they don’t know the basics of computing.
Nonsense. There are way more programmers now than there were in the Windows 3.1/9x era when you couldn’t avoid files and folders. Ok more people are exposed to computers in general, but still… Anyone who has the interest to learn isn’t going to be stopped by not knowing what file and folders are.
It’s like saying people don’t become car mechanics because you don’t have to hand crank your engine any more.
Programming is alien. It’s fundamentally hard to comprehend, because the computer will do exactly what you tell it to, regardless of what you mean. You have to think for the both of you.
I’m not sure I agree. I think most people can understand recipes or instruction lists and totally could program, if they wanted to and had to. They just don’t want to and usually don’t have to. They find it boring, tedious and it’s also increasingly inaccessible (e.g. JavaScript tooling is the classic example).
But I think mainly people just don’t find it interesting. To understand this, think about law. You absolutely have the intellect to be a lawyer (you clever clog), so why aren’t you? For me, it’s mind-numbingly boring. If I was really into law and enjoyed decoding their unnecessarily obtuse language then I totally would be a lawyer. But I don’t.
I see this as an accessibility problem, computers have incredible power but taking advantage of it requires a very specific way of thinking and the drive to push through adversity (the computer constantly and correctly telling you “you’re doing it wrong”) that a lot of people can’t or don’t want to do. I don’t think they’re wrong or lazy to feel that way, and it’s a barrier to entry just like a set of stairs is to a wheelchair user.
The question is what to do about it, and there’s so much we as an industry should be doing before we even start to think about getting “normies” writing code or automating their phones. Using a computer sucks ass in so many ways for regular people, you buy something cheap and it’s slow as hell, it’s crapped up with adware and spyware out of the box, scammers are everywhere ready to cheat you out of your money… anyone here is likely immune to all that or knows how to navigate it but most people are just muddling by.
If we got past all that, I think it’d be a question of meeting users where they are. I have a car but I couldn’t replace the brakes, nor do I want to learn or try to learn, but that’s okay. My car is as accessible as I want it to be, and the parts that aren’t accessible, I go another route (bring it to a mechanic who can do the things I can’t). We can do this with computers too, make things easy for regular people but don’t try to make them all master programmers or tell them they aren’t “really” using it unless they’re coding. Bring the barrier down as low is it can go but don’t expect everyone to be trying to jump over it all the time, because they likely care about other things more.
When I was a kid in the 90s I had a PC that came with Windows 3.1 and it had QBasic. I messed around with it a lot. I spent a lot of time reading the built-in documentation.
I remember making a random password generator, a text-based blackjack game, and some “screensavers” that were basically just drawing a bunch of stuff on the screen and then scrolling it off the top by printing blank lines.
It took quite a bit of time to do that pretty basic stuff, so it’s really not a surprise to me that most people aren’t making computer programs today. Most of anything an average person could hope to program has already been done and made available for free.
nibbles.bas
, a classic. I wonder if you can pay it online.I did basically all those things, or very similar things, in TI-BASIC back in high school. I didn’t care that they had already been done countless times; I had a blast figuring out how to make them work.
I dearly wish more people would try making basic programs that are 100% their own creation, even if it’s some random string generator. It’s more rewarding than they might think!
Same here. I missed the lecture of many math classes figuring out basic on my ti84+. I mostly wrote simple games. The calculator made it easy to experiment since all the functionality could be found in menus or a button somewhere.
Yep, same! It’s probably a good thing that I didn’t know the first thing about Z80 assembly or I’d have flunked hard 😂 I would have loved to make my own clone of Phoenix!
I dunno. I’ve been programming on and off since the 1980s and professionally since the early 2000s. It still always takes me forever to build anything worthwhile and even longer to maintain it. Most software these days is complicated enough that it requires many people to build and maintain. I’m not sure that “everyone should be equipped to program what they need” was realistic even back in the 1980s, let alone with today’s complexity.
Most users don’t want to be sucked down a bottomless time hole just getting their computer to do a thing it won’t do, and understandably prefer to have someone else suffer this for them, then use what was built.
So I don’t know about the goal of everyone being able to program. I still think it’s a worthwhile goal that people should have full control over their machines so that they can install and uninstall what they want, configure devices to work the best way for them, and turn off the features that don’t serve the user at all. And I think open source software is great for bringing technically inclined people together to collaborate on what’s actually useful to people.
I agree entirely, especially as modern systems massively ballooning the required knowledge and skill.
However, I do think there could’ve perhaps been a happy medium, where OS’s retained and continued to develop a simple, built in way to program easily and without setup to retain the spirit of what BASIC provided.
I guess I’m imagining a sort’ve evolved version of Hypercard, which seemed to be on the path of providing something like that.
The beauty of HyperCard is that it lets people program without having to learn how to write code — what I call “programming for the rest of us”. HyperCard has made it possible for people to do things they wouldn’t have ever thought of doing in the past without a lot of heavy-duty programming. It’s let a lot of non-programmers, like me, into that loop.
David Lingwood, APDA
There seems to be Decker as a spiritual successor, which is pretty neat.
HyperCard was created by Bill Atkinson following an LSD trip.[11]
🤯
Steve Jobs doing a hiring interview in Apple’s early days:
https://folklore.org/Gobble_Gobble_Gobble.html?sort=date
In January, we began interviewing candidates for the software manager position.
As soon as the guy walked into the room, I knew it was going to be problematic, because he seemed extremely straight-laced and uptight, dressing more like an insurance salesman than a technologist.
I could tell that Steve was losing patience when he started to roll his eyes at the candidate’s responses. Steve began to grill him with some unconventional questions.
“How old were you when you lost your virginity?”, Steve asked
The candidate wasn’t sure if he heard correctly. “What did you say?”
Steve repeated the question, changing it slightly. “Are you a virgin?”. Burrell and I started to laugh, as the candidate became more disconcerted. He didn’t know how to respond.
Steve changed the subject. “How many times have you taken LSD?”
The poor guy was turning varying shades of red, so I tried to change the subject and asked a straight-forward technical question. But when he started to give a long-winded response, Steve got impatient again.
“Gooble, gobble, gobble, gobble”, Steve started making turkey noises. This was too much for Burrell and myself, and we all started cracking up. “Gobble, gobble, gobble”, Steve continued, laughing himself now.
At this point, the candidate stood up. “I guess I’m not the right guy for this job”, he said.
“I guess you’re not”, Steve responded. “I think this interview is over.”
I’ve felt for a long time that continuous gradients of complexity with sensible defaults all along the spectrum is a general architectural pattern necessary for wide spread empowerment. But I don’t see anyone thinking in those terms. Maybe it’s just me, but it feels obvious. As you say, but everyone is going to dive into the source code. So let them find the level at which they’re comfortable.
That’s a good way of thinking about it. Even experienced developers appreciate being able to put the bones of an application together as quickly as possible so they can focus on the bits that make it unique.
Yea, and then being able to traverse the layers in a reasonable way when needed/desired without needing be stuck or live in one of those layers.
50 years after BASIC and nothing is written in BASIC.
To replicate its success from the 80s we would need a language that is simple enough for everyone to learn but actually performant and powerful enough to write an entire operating system and application stack in. Then perhaps non-programmers would feel more inclined to look under the hood, see how things work, and change their program’s behavior.
The problem though, is that for any reasonably complex system or application, you need to use structured programming. This is what enabled the levels of abstraction that we use to break down programs into layers that can be understood in pieces, and it is what makes large complex software possible without ending up with a mess of spaghetti.
However it is these abstractions that turn a software’s code into a Domain Specific Language, and endless APIs that need to be learnt and understood by the programmer.
For programmers it is normal to us that when we want to work on a new codebase we have to learn the idiosyncrasies of the codebase, and learn its DSL and the APIs that it uses, or exposes. But for a non-programmer, this would essentially feel like learning everything about programming from scratch. They would have to become a programmer and develop maintainer skills just to understand what they want to change. (This is why programmer is still a job).
Perhaps the real value of BASIC was that without structured programming, every program was just a pile of spaghetti that even a child could pull apart with a fork.
However it is these abstractions that turn a software’s code into a Domain Specific Language, and endless APIs that need to be learnt and understood by the programmer.
I’d kill for a modern HyperCard.
Maybe hold off on the homicide. I bet someone has done something like that.
kagis
https://andregarzia.com/2019/07/livecode-is-a-modern-day-hypercard.html
LiveCode is a modern day HyperCard and everyone who used HyperCard will feel at home at it.
LiveCode runs on macOS, Windows and Linux and can generate standalone binaries for all those platforms plus Android and iOS. You can get it from https://www.livecode.com/ or you can get a GPL version of it from https://www.livecode.org/.
The language looks reminiscent of my memories of HyperTalk.
Looks like the open source version was axed, and the cheapest subscription plan is $36.67 per month per user. Yikes.
After the axing there was an effort to salvage the last open source versions, and build something from there: http://openxtalk.org/
Oh nice! I did a quick search for forks but didn’t find that, so thanks for linking. I’ll check it out!
Why would a new hypothetical language need to be able to build an OS for everyday people to take interest? I don’t see how that would be the case at all
I don’t see how an accessible language should also need to be able to be used for system programming. A simpler python seems like a better option.
Scratch is an example of a simple programming language that could be taken pretty far, but it’s often dismissed as a kid’s game.
Or even things like IFTTT, or Apple’s Automator app (formerly called just AppleScript) that gave vaguely python like tools to less/non-programmers.
I worked on a programming tool to bring beginners from a block language like scratch up through C or Python, but we couldn’t get enough funding to finish it and google just looked at us and tried to poorly rip it off (made raising funding to compete with them even harder).
Today’s users have massive amounts of computer power at their disposal, thanks to sales of billions of desktop and laptop PCs, tablets and smartphones. They’re all programmable. Users should be able to do just enough programming to make them work the way they want. Is that too much to ask?
Smartphones – and to a lesser degree, tablets – kind of are not a phenomenal programming platform. Yeah, okay, they have the compute power, but most programming environments – and certainly the ones that I’d consider the best ones – are text-based, and in 2025, text entry on a touchscreen still just isn’t as good as with a physical keyboard. I’ll believe that there is room to considerably improve on existing text-entry mechanisms, though I’m skeptical that touchscreen-based text entry is ever going to be at par with keyboard-based text entry.
You can add a Bluetooth keyboard. And it’s not essential. But it is a real barrier. If I were going to author Android software, I do not believe that I’d do the authoring on an Android device.
When Dartmouth College launched the Basic language 50 years ago, it enabled ordinary users to write code. Millions did. But we’ve gone backwards since then, and most users now seem unable or unwilling to create so much as a simple macro
I don’t know about this “going backwards” stuff.
I can believe that a higher proportion of personal computer users in 1990 could program to at least some degree than could the proportion of, say, users of Web-browser-capable devices today.
But not everyone in 1990 had a personal computer, and I would venture to say that the group that did probably was not a representative sample of the population. I’d give decent odds that a lower proportion of the population as a whole could program in 1990 than today.
I do think that you could make an argument that the accessibility of a programming environment somewhat-declined for a while, but I don’t know about it being monotonically.
It was pretty common, for personal computers around 1980, to ship with some kind of BASIC programming environment. Boot up an Apple II, hit…I forget the key combination, but it’ll drop you straight into a ROM-based BASIC programming environment.
After that generation, things got somewhat weaker for a time.
DOS had batch files. I don’t recall whether QBasic was standard with the OS. checks it did for a period with MS-DOS, but was a subset of QuickBasic. I don’t believe that it was still included by later in the Windows era.
The Mac did not ship with a (free) programming environment.
I think that that was probably about the low point.
GNU/Linux was a wild improvement over this situation.
And widespread Internet availability also helped, as it made it easier to distribute programming environments and tools.
Today, I think that both MacOS and Windows ship with somewhat-more sophisticated programming tools. I’m out of date on MacOS, but last I looked, it had access to the Unix stuff via
brew
, and probably has a set of MacOS-specific stuff out there that’s downloadable. Windows ships with Powershell, and the most-basic edition of Visual Studio can be downloaded gratis.It also has to be said that mobile operating systems are terrible platforms for getting into programming. The gateway drug for programming is scripting and that’s pretty much impossible there, at least without doing it in some existing automation app, which isn’t going to be a transferable skill.
Even if you do have a PC to try to develop a full-fledged app, that’s an incredibly daunting endeavor. I could probably code out ten CLIs in a shorter time frame than one simple app.
Smartphones – and to a lesser degree, tablets – kind of are not a phenomenal programming platform.
[…]
But not everyone in 1990 had a personal computer, and I would venture to say that the group that did probably was not a representative sample of the population. I’d give decent odds that a lower proportion of the population as a whole could program in 1990 than today.
Yeah, and these things influence each other. Today we have a networked computer in our pockets, and depending on where you live, they may or may not be required or the standard way to do tasks like get a bus ticket, login to government websites so you can do your taxes and whatnot, transfer money, and a bunch of other tasks that to a degree are really sensitive.
So as we have a bunch of barely computer-literate people functionally dependent on these devices, we also need them to be locked down and secure. MS had some grand thoughts about “code everywhere”, which turns out is pretty awful security-wise, especially with gullible networked users. The users in this community have very different capabilities and needs than the users who might not even want a computer, but feel forced to get one because the government stopped using paper and bank and post offices no longer exist. (This is, essentially, what it’s like in modern Norway. We might be ending home delivery of snail mail soon; mail delivery every other weekday seems to be an unnecessary expense.) Beyond the lack of a keyboard, the platform has a bunch of constraints that don’t make for fun computing, but they absolutely need to be there. Unfortunately we also wind up with a split between the common restricted platforms, and the casual, customizable platforms, and not everybody gets to be exposed to the latter.
There are probably, in absolute numbers, a whole lot more people who know js or Python than people who knew BASIC in the 80s. In addition there are people who are pretty good at spreadsheet programming, and other tasks that are essentially coding, even if they’re not listed as regular programming languages.
Hypercard was free for a while.
Windows 3 shipped with Toolbook (hypercard clone) free for a while.
Hypercard was free for a while.
Yeah, and I wrote some stuff in HyperTalk, but IIRC it turned into some sort of Hypercard-the-authoring-environment and Hypercard-the-player split, with the player being redistributable.
kagis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperCard
At the same time HyperCard 2.0 was being developed, a separate group within Apple developed and in 1991 released HyperCard IIGS, a version of HyperCard for the Apple IIGS system. Aimed mainly at the education market, HyperCard IIGS has roughly the same feature set as the 1.x versions of Macintosh HyperCard, while adding support for the color graphics abilities of the IIGS. Although stacks (HyperCard program documents) are not binary-compatible, a translator program (another HyperCard stack) allows them to be moved from one platform to the other.
Then, Apple decided that most of its application software packages, including HyperCard, would be the property of a wholly owned subsidiary called Claris. Many of the HyperCard developers chose to stay at Apple rather than move to Claris, causing the development team to be split. Claris attempted to create a business model where HyperCard could also generate revenues. At first the freely-distributed versions of HyperCard shipped with authoring disabled. Early versions of Claris HyperCard contain an Easter Egg: typing “magic” into the message box converts the player into a full HyperCard authoring environment.[15] When this trick became nearly universal, they wrote a new version, HyperCard Player, which Apple distributed with the Macintosh operating system, while Claris sold the full version commercially. Many users were upset that they had to pay to use software that had traditionally been supplied free and which many considered a basic part of the Mac.
Hmm. Sounds like the interaction was more-complicated than just that.
I’m not sure what programming tools you are saying ship with windows, I’m not aware of any. And on Mac, brew is not from apple and must be installed by cli iirc. Xcode is the tool available for their ecosystem and it’s not included with the OS but is a free albeit enormous download
I only used BASIC to open infinite windows to crash Windows 95.
In my experience it doesn’t matter how accessible the language becomes, most people find the precision required to make machines behave in a desirable way is exhausting or alien to them.
This isn’t any kind of failing though. I’ve come to see how organising modern businesses (with processes, regulations, standard etc) is a kind of “programming”. And there are many who are good at that (designing human processes to automate goals) where I completely flounder, even with the help of the ‘right’ training, books, coaching etc
I can only think of one example where some simple programming skills could benefit ordinary users: Home Automation. All the more difficult stuff is already neatly packaged into ready to use modules, and the user doesn’t have to worry about the ZigBee protocol or APIs or network ports to turn on a light bulb. Here some knowledge about conditionals, variables, loops can easily be used to program useful automations.