homemade computer for fun and experience...

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sun Apr 4 18:35:48 1999

Keep in mind, folks, that some of us remember when there simply weren't
computers which we could use. Back when I was a boy, even the US GOV
couldn't afford a computer capable of what my smallest simplest Windows9x
system is capable. The fact that I don't use it for pure number-crunching
is a recognition that there are other things equally deserving of the
benefits of advancing technology. If a picture is worth a thousand words,
then why type them if it's easier to draw the graphic representation.
Moreover, if you have to read my 1000 words (about a page) and then draw
yourself a graphic representation to understand and digest it anyway, why
not stick to the graphic? A simple graphic can save both ends of a
communication time, effort, and embarassment from when there's a
miscommunication.

If you tend to use your hands when you're explaining something, you probably
know what I mean.

Dick

-----Original Message-----
From: jpero_at_cgocable.net <jpero_at_cgocable.net>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Sunday, April 04, 1999 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: homemade computer for fun and experience...


>Date sent: Sun, 4 Apr 1999 16:23:49 -0600
>Send reply to: classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu
>From: "Richard Erlacher" <edick_at_idcomm.com>
>To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers"
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
>Subject: Re: homemade computer for fun and experience...
>Originally to: <classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
>
>> Well, I'm inclined to agree with you. I've long felt that if one needed
>> to spend time playing games, what was really needed was another job.
>>
>> What's happened over the years, however, is that people, having seen what
>> a computer CAN do as shown in games, etc, have actually found ways to
make
>> data easier to interpret, and perhaps to add meaning and emphasis to a
>> presentation, making it more persuasive, if not more informative, by
using
>> the graphical capabilities of a computer.
>
>Beauiful point and to point that out, we're still doing it even way
>back from stone and clubs days. Graphics on any media is easier
>to understand than stackful of numbers and words even spoken!
>Even when I was in elementery and HS school we generate
>numbers and words into graphics respentions or vice vesa. That
>was in CP/M to 386 days but didn't use computers.
>
>>
>> As for the terminal vis-a-vie the color graphic display, I find the
>> terminal quite limiting. However, most of the stuff I do is unaffected
by
>
>Terminal is out because one would have to code so much that you
>really made another i/o out of software. I'm at that mental stage
>now. Better start in hardware then put bit of homebrew s/w in to
>get started.
>
>> Today, no one would normally consider a CP/M box for "useful" and
>> essential work. For mental masturbation, speculation about would could,
>> would, or should (note the subjunctive) have been, CP/M works just fine.
>> If you have a construction business, or a medical office, there's no
>> reason why CP/M can't work today every bit as well as it did back 20 or
>> more years ago. However, aside from the notion of operating on an
>> "antique" there's no reason to do so. It does serve to keep one grounded
>> in what has changed over the years and what hasn't.
>
>We're still writing characters/numbers and users are using so
>powerful computers *because* it's easier for them to see in
>graphics form and graphics items to operate at or in to get basic
>functions done besides writing and putting numbers in. That eat up
>more power just to do that. Crunching numbers and doing massive
>moves in graphics, is one thing I accept. And, decent windowing
>that does quickly and low on resources requirements does get job
>done bit easier that about it as I know so far.
>
>> Dick
>>
>Wizard
Received on Sun Apr 04 1999 - 18:35:48 BST