This will be a good discussion.
On Tue, 12 Jan 1999, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
> This'll probably offend many.
>
> I think that an 8 year old would be best off with a machine with CD-ROM
> capability. And a good size stack of reference disks, including
> Encyclopedia Brittanica, atlases, and several collections of literature.
Well, personally, I think that to give the child a better understanding of
the computer, they should start with something simple and (dare I say)
rudimentary, like a C64 or Apple II (Certainly more rudimentary than a
modern day PC with a GUI masquerading as an OS). They will become more in
tune with what each component of the computer is for. Instead of one big
box with everything inside, all the components of a computer--the CPU,
mass storage, output, etc.--is separate on an old computer. With a C64,
you have the computer with the keyboard, the disk drive, a tape drive,
etc. I think it helps the child to better understand the distinction of
the different subsystems in the computer.
My intent would be to give the child a headstart in the world of
engineering. By distracting them with graphics and sound and all that
nonsense you deprive them of senses they will need to make better
engineers later on in life. They may get blown off course with all these
distractions and perhaps never discover that they have a keen interest in
the technology until they are in college, at which point their best
learning years have already passed them by.
I say, give a kid a simple computer, like I grew up on (something somewhat
complicated but not impossible): an Apple II. Or what the hell, a PDP-11
if the kid has the aptitude (like young Danny Seagraves :)
If they don't really care for programming (at least not for the time
being) then go ahead and get them a more modern machine that can run
Windows and access CD ROMs.
I think what you are suggesting is to give kids a powerful tool for
learning, whereas what I'm suggesting is to give them something they can
use to help them grow intellectually in a way that is more specific to the
actual technology of the computer itself. In other words, study the tool,
not what the tool allows you to study.
It all depends on what you want your child to be learning, so in this
respect, I'm with Daddy Chuck.
> For programming, I would recommend BASIC, TO START WITH, followed by an
> introduction to C and assembly as soon as basic principles are understood.
I don't see anything wrong with BASIC as a useable language for kids. I
don't know why people are so down on it. Ok, so it doesn't have
functions, and no, I wouldn't try to build a career out of it. I don't
think throwing C and assembler at a kid "as soon as the basic principles
are understood" would be necessarily productive. Let them have BASIC
until its apparent they've outgrown it, then let them explore other
options (but please keep them away from COBOL and Pascal :)
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar_at_siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Always being hassled by the man.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See
http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 12/27/98]
Received on Tue Jan 12 1999 - 16:57:16 GMT