Favourite computer history books?
in [Mac Systems]
|
Prev: Scanning to a multipage pdf?
Next: Apple co-branding
From: Steve Hix on 4 May 2010 15:06 In article <1b4oin4ow5.fsf(a)snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>, Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer(a)cs.nmsu.edu> wrote: > Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> writes: > > > In article <1b39y7n47b.fsf(a)snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>, > > Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer(a)cs.nmsu.edu> wrote: > > > >> None of the three is remotely plausible. > > > > That's what "they" said about almost every innovation. > > That's a common response, but simply is not true. Nobody laughed at > Copernicus and Galileo; Galileo wan't placed under house arrest because > his ideas were regarded as crazy, it was because the Church was afraid > of the theological implications of those ideas. More than that, the old curmudgeon managed to annoy almost everyone in which he came in contact, including would be friends. At least one Cardinal read his work, and engaged in some correspondence with Galileo, agreeing with most of it. It wasn't the astronomical parts of his work that angered them. It didn't help that Galileo basically used a major RC cardinal (Pope?) as a character in making his argument, and named the guy the equivalent of "Simpleton".
From: Walter Bushell on 4 May 2010 15:28 In article <20100504172648.b52b00ae.steveo(a)eircom.net>, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo(a)eircom.net> wrote: > You can get as close as you like to the speed of light - provided > you have enough energy to hand. Getting nice little things like electrons > and protons very close to the speed of light is common practice, getting > big things like spaceships up there is rather harder. From your own frame of reference, you are just as far away as when you started acceleration. -- A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
From: Charles Richmond on 4 May 2010 15:38 Joe Pfeiffer wrote: > Warren Oates <warren.oates(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> In article <1b4oin4ow5.fsf(a)snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>, >> Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer(a)cs.nmsu.edu> wrote: >> >>> That's a common response, but simply is not true. Nobody laughed at >>> Copernicus and Galileo; Galileo wan't placed under house arrest because >>> his ideas were regarded as crazy, it was because the Church was afraid >>> of the theological implications of those ideas. Nobody laughed at >>> Newton. Nobody laughed at Darwin (and, once again, the only real >>> opposition to evolution is based on theology). Nobody laughed at the >>> Wright Brothers or Edison. >> But they _did_ laugh at Tesla. >> >> <http://recombu.com/news/nikola-tesla-predicted-mobile-phones-in-1909_M11683.html> > > Because Tesla was the single best example I've ever heard of of somebody > who was both a genius and a certifiable loon. And even Lord Kelvin said that heavier-than-air machines can *not* fly. Different groups of scientists often propose different theories of how things work. Their support of their theories is often highly colored by their opinions and egos. For a new theory to be fully accepted, often the "old guard" have to die out. -- +----------------------------------------+ | Charles and Francis Richmond | | | | plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com | +----------------------------------------+
From: Charles Richmond on 4 May 2010 15:41 Peter Flass wrote: > Charles Richmond wrote: >> >> >> And don't forget the Charles Babbage Institute at the University of >> Minnesota: >> >> http://www.cbi.umn.edu/ >> > > CBI is disappointing because they don't have anything online. They seem > to have a good collection of stuff, but apparently no interest in > scanning any of it. The Charles Babbage Institute has the contents of much of their collection listed online. If you want to *see* some of it, you have to visit their site on the University of Minnesota campus. But then to appreciate the different computer museums, you have to physically go there too. -- +----------------------------------------+ | Charles and Francis Richmond | | | | plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com | +----------------------------------------+
From: Charles Richmond on 4 May 2010 15:48
jmfbahciv wrote: > Michelle Steiner wrote: >> In article <4bdebe92$0$14781$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, >> Warren Oates <warren.oates(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> I would say _Tiger, Tiger_ (Renamed _The Stars My Destination_ for the >>>> US) is the best sci-fi book ever written. What is even more remarkable >>>> is that is was written over 50 years ago during the early days of >>>> Sci-Fi. It reads very much like a book from the early 80's in many >>>> ways. >>> Umm. Young man, are you really suggesting that 1956 was "the early days >>> of Sci-Fi?" Now, I won't bring up the Epic of Gilgamesh, but I will >>> suggest that in our more-or-less modern era, that Frankenstein counts as >>> science fiction. >>> >>> Oh, and there was that Verne fellow ... >> Not to mention that Wells guy, or Gernsback, who is considered the father >> of modern science fiction. >> > > Did you know that Mark Twain wrote science fiction? I don't have the > book unpacked so I can't give you the title. > > /BAH _A Conneticutt Yankee in King Authur's Court_??? -- +----------------------------------------+ | Charles and Francis Richmond | | | | plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com | +----------------------------------------+ |