From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 101deb,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,c9f2b97a84c48976 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-06 16:12:09 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.frii.net!easynews!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3B4645AA.A3E1975F@acm.org> From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (OS/2; U) X-Accept-Language: en-US,en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml,comp.lang.java.advocacy Subject: Re: Market pressures for more reliable software References: <9gsvr7$7ho$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9folnd$1t8$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B1FE1FE.B49AE27F@noaa.gov> <9fotpi$4k6$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3b24dc21$1@news.tce.com> <3B25D5FB.15C9B240@dresdner-bank.com> <9g5as6$hbq$1@magnum.mmm.com> <9g5ipg$roq$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9g614i$at4$1@magnum.mmm.com> <9g7r02$mni$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3b366a2b$6$fuzhry$mr2ice@va.news.verio.net> <9h7guv$pt1$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B3879CE.AC550F8E@acm.org> <3B3E73E8.F9C36524@ix.netcom.com> <3B405DDF.5C3F9207@acm.org> <3B416975.D7F0691D@ix.netcom.com> <3B432AD8.3828FB9@acm.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 19:11:41 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.55.10.86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 994461114 206.55.10.86 (Fri, 06 Jul 2001 23:11:54 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 23:11:54 GMT Organization: Verio Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9582 comp.lang.java.programmer:81038 comp.lang.pl1:1206 comp.lang.vrml:3994 comp.lang.java.advocacy:22783 Date: 2001-07-06T19:11:41-04:00 List-Id: Gary Labowitz wrote: > This is getting ridiculous. You are SO hoping that computing and programming > were not centralized that you skip an entrie generation. No, I'm simply taking into account the context of this thread, which is the alleged difference before and after the PC became a major factor in the marketplace. > When most people talk about early days, they mean when computers actually > came into the marketplace and were large centralized systems. I see no evidence of that. I believe that most of the current generation of programmers would regard the era before S/370 as the early days. > Certainly > programmers could be stationed anywhere. But terminal systems (starting with > the various 1050-type systems) weren't available in the "early days." > Actually, I remember the introduction of the 1050 as a big deal (about 1963 > or so, maybe a little later). While I certainly was using punched cards in those days, I was also reading about systems that didn't. Certainly terminals were available on IBM computers prior to 1963, even on the lowly 650. > Anyway, the later systems developed the RJE-type systems, which > decentralized the point at which program streams could be entered and > printed. They still connected to centralized processing, however. Since all > the terminals were dumb, there was only decentralized job entry and > printing. > The real point is: so what? So you said "in the early days we had > decentralized computing" and were wrong. Which part of "programming" don't you understand? > Live with it. Live with what? The fact that you can't read. I never denied that there was centralized hardware. > Let's get on with today's problems. Santayan. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz