I was surprised when I actually dabbled in x86 ASM (in the guise of MASM which arguably is a higher-level language than direct ASM) with BIOS and DOS interrupts as functions - it's quite close to C and not at all difficult - just tedious.

A powerful editor/IDE makes it ... not the worst programming experience in the world.

And since it's "so detailed" it's pretty easy to understand and explain, unlike higher-level languages that "do everything for you".

Sometimes utilities can be production-grade, tho, so I don't think that captures the nonchalance the author was looking for.

"Home-cooked apps" is still my preferred phrase. Personal software and subsistence development are also good terms.

I like the new term which distinguishes it from "utilities" that are personal tools used for programming it self.

"Utilities" is a generic term suggesting it is small, potentially reusable, purpose-limited, and used to simplify a task.

"Utilities" doesn't indicate the audience or the intended longevity of use of the tool like "houseplant" and "bouquet" do.

Both indicate they are built for personal use cases, suggesting potentially low reusability. The longevity of "houseplant" suggests it's intended for ongoing use, while "bouquet" suggests a limited use tool.

With work, either could be made reusable for others, but I think it's implied that the scope is an edge case or uncommon case that likely only applies to its creator or a very limited audience.

I see value in the terms, but these terms may themselves be houseplant terms, not sure if general adoption is useful to someone not building houseplant software, they are mostly hobbiest terms by definition.