Sellam Ismail wrote:
> What's "real word processing"? You must mean What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get.
> In that case, sure, an 80x24 screen would be nice, but the same can be
> achieved (and was, in fact) on 40x24 screens. And if we want to talk real
> "real" word processing, why stop at 24 lines? Why not the requisite 60
> lines to get a full page?
>
> By your standard, no computer even today can perform "real" word
> processing.
All word processing is, is a way to electronically store and edit a form
of writing, so one doesn't have to print several wrong copies to get one
that is correct. The simplest of tasks done on a computer.
> Lowercase? A nice amenity, but the fact again is that even on computers
> that didn't have lowercase capability, people came up with effective ways
> to get around that limitation. You seem to want to go back and compare
> today's state of the art on computer technology of two decades ago. It's
> the equivalent of saying that nobody could get from Point A to Point B in
> any automobile before 1930 because they didn't have fuel injection, power
> steering and AM/FM radio.
Yep and that's why we have gas sucking SUV's on the road rather than
small cars.
> So what? People still did useful work on those machines. I wrote a
> database program to store my comic book collection on a computer with 2K
> of effective memory and a rubber "chiclet" keyboard using cassette tape
> for storage. Are you saying this was't real?
People on an ego trip with their latest Wintel boxes all have that same
attitude. Back in the days of a few K memory, you had to program tight,
and do just what you had to do to get the job done. By definition, my
VIC20 is a computer just like a Linux/Beowolf or Cray is.
> I don't know, but I suspect you'll argue that real work couldn't be
> performed with computers of today because we don't have 4 terabytes of
> main memory and a 100 Quadrabyte hard drive.
Those are needed for the latest incarnation of Windows code bloat. Real
O/S's should be minimal, like cp/m was in its day.
> I have no idea what you are arguing about now. Sure, computers still have
> a way to go, but how does that justify your saying that no real work could
> be done on old 9-bit computers?????
>
> Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
I stand and applaud your honesty on this thread.
Gary Hildebrand
St. Joseph, MO
Received on Sun Nov 24 2002 - 19:51:00 GMT