Computers for children

From: Ward D. Griffiths III <gram_at_cnct.com>
Date: Tue Jan 12 20:35:45 1999

Well, I was reading before my fourth birthday, but there weren't any
(kid accessable) computers in 1959. I had to use paper. I thought
my mother was leaving out the good parts of the stories she was
reading to me, turned out she was reading me stories without any good
parts. It made me unpopular in school from kindergarten on, since I
was given full and unlimited use of the public library when I was
eight, since the librarians got tired of me hanging around when they
were trying to close and the round-trip home to get a permission note
from the parental unit cut seriously into my reading time, especially
since if it was past dark said unit didn't want me going back to the
library, so the rest of the evening was wasted.

I was 23 when I started programming computers, unless you count the
Digi-comp I. Other than that, a slide rule was my main tool through
high school, I bought my first calculator (a Novus Mathematician)
for half a month's pay when I was in the USAF.

Computers are good for a kid to learn. But books are critical.

Ward Griffiths
"the timid die just like the daring; and if you don't take the plunge then
you'll just take the fall" Michael Longcor

On Tue, 12 Jan 1999, Uncle Roger wrote:

> At 02:34 PM 1/12/99 -0800, you wrote:
> >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.
>
> Uh-oh, here goes Uncle Roger again...
>
> There are a lot of *really* good educational programs out there nowadays.
> Davidson, Learning Company, Br0derbund are some good names. They can
> really help kids get ahead. My niece is already reading at 4yo thanks to
> Interactive Reading Journey. (Not a record by any stretch, but no one is
> really pushing her.)
>
> I could go on for hours, but I won't...
>
> >There should also be WWW access, preferably with at least minimal
> >graphics capability.
>
> The younger the kid, the more they need graphics capability. Teenagers
> don't really need it, no matter how much they beg for it (they just want to
> visit whitehouse.com).
>
> >In the PC world, that would call for 386SX with VGA video, and DOS 3.10
>
> Or a Mac IIci, both of which will require access to older software.
> Pentium or PowerPC is required for much of the good stuff you see at places
> like ChumpUSA.
>
> Used parts can be put together into a low-end/slow pentium for probably a
> lot less than $500, but that's still more than $10 + shipping. And for a
> dedicated task like learning a bit of programming, playing with some
> graphics, and a few games, a C64/Atari 800/Apple II would be fine.
>
> Also, BASIC, as maligned as it is, is useful for learning; I applied my
> BASIC experience to make learning PERL a snap. (And BASIC is very useful
> in its own right.)
Received on Tue Jan 12 1999 - 20:35:45 GMT