|
I'm tired of the British always trying to steal American glory.
If it were up to this American we'd of never introduced tea to the British Isles.
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes I bet you wish you never discovered us in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
I thought you were discovered by the spanish
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm, lets see.
Z3 was the world's first working programmable, fully automatic digital computer. (1941)
Colossus is the world's first electronic digital computer that was programmable. (1944)
Eniac is the first electronic general-purpose computer. (1946)
Are everyone satisfied now? 
|
|
|
|
|
Um...maybe not.
I'd be tempted to throw the Jacquard Loom[^] into the picture: programmable, digital, working (and still in use in some places) - invented in 1801 - and kick started the Industrial Revolution.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I thought "computer" was the keyword. 
|
|
|
|
|
You can program it, it has input and output - heck, it's even got a graphics display(if a bit low resolution, unless it is working with really fine silk).
What does a computer do that this doesn't? (Apart from play Doom )
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I was going to say that you can't use it for calculations, but I know it would hit back on me. You probably could play Doom on it, even if very slowly.
So, what's the definition of Computer?
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: So, what's the definition of Computer?
A machine that makes humans waste their lives arguing about semantics.
|
|
|
|
|
Must resist upvoting...
Failed again.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know!
Google defines it as:
"an electronic device which is capable of receiving information (data) in a particular form and of performing a sequence of operations in accordance with a predetermined but variable set of procedural instructions (program) to produce a result in the form of information or signals."
But Wiki says:
"A computer is a general purpose device that can be programmed to carry out a set of arithmetic or logical operations automatically. Since a sequence of operations can be readily changed, the computer can solve more than one kind of problem."
And I have to say that the google definition is closer to my ideal! But...the "electronic" bit would exclude the Jacquard Loom - and also the Babbage Difference Engine. Removing that would remove Ada Lovelace from the role of "first programmer" and I'm pretty sure she deserves that title!
So my feeling is that the Google definition (sans one word) fits a computer well - and also the loom.
You have to remember that all out modern computers are based on devices which worked solely from punched cards - which started life as a data storage media, which were derived from the loom!
As usual, the "Search for Beginnings" is complicated...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: As usual, the "Search for Beginnings" is complicated...
What was first? The chicken or the egg?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
That one's easy: the egg.
1) Long, long before the first even vaguely recognisable chicken-like creature, dinosaurs were laying eggs (among a lot of other species over the years)
2) And then...[^]
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: What does a computer do that this doesn't? (Apart from play Doom )
We can't say for sure if we didn't try. The result would be one of a kind cloth 
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
I think the ping time would make it kinda difficult to play!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Why? With such a low framerate you'd have plenty of time to react so you should be able to hit anything with a perfect shot
|
|
|
|
|
By which time it's in a different county, never mind room!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
The Ping is the excuse of the weak !
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
Argonia wrote: The Ping is the excuse of the weak week!
FTFY!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: What does a computer do that this doesn't? (Apart from play Doom )
It took me Four Hours to make that f***in' cacodemon, and you just chopped it up with a f***in' chainsaw!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Charles Babbage went to France and saw a Jacquard loom that created a multi-color silk portrait of Napoleon using over a million cardboard rectangles into which holes were punched to regulate weaving.
But, I'm not sure I'd call that digital.
«If you search in Google for 'no-one ever got fired for buying IBM:' the top-hit is the Wikipedia article on 'Fear, uncertainty and doubt'» What does that tell you about sanity in these times?
|
|
|
|
|
It's binary - on for a hole, off for the absence of a hole. So it isn't analog!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure that the Jacquard Loom can be considered digital. Certainly the Loom meets the test of "fully programmable" in the sense that, up to its mechanical/physical limits, it could render any design that could be made with the thread at hand.
And, the cardboard "program" (sewn together cards) was, indeed, rolled off a spindle in a sequence, as I recall (based on reading over thirty-years ago). No undo, no goto, no recursion: the ultimate declarative language ?
Would a true "digital" computer have to have a memory-store, and the capability of some kind of branching based on conditional evaluation, and looping ? I think so. I'm trying to remember the names of those three Italian theorists who stipulated that those three attributes were essential for a Turing machine, but drawing a blank.
I'm inclined to think the true "computer" in the case of the Jacquard Loom was the human intelligence that figured out what cards were needed, and how they should be punched.
cheers, Bill
«If you search in Google for 'no-one ever got fired for buying IBM:' the top-hit is the Wikipedia article on 'Fear, uncertainty and doubt'» What does that tell you about sanity in these times?
|
|
|
|
|
Quite right, I was aware of the German work. Forgot it was called the Z3. The Nazis didn't see what it was good for.
Destroyed by bombing if I remember. Another first.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
