23 Jan
2017
23 Jan
'17
2:22 p.m.
On 2017-01-23 6:52 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 01/23/2017 12:25 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
The 7070/74 was just a member of the 7000 line. The 7030 STRETCH and
even the 7090/94 were both binary and far faster.
It's just that I bridle a bit when hearing the young 'uns refer to any
physically large machine as a "supercomputer".
It's the same feeling that I get when I see press releases today that
relate that David Gelernter single-handedly developed the parallel
computation. He's not old enough; at 61, he was still in high school
during the ILLIAC IV era.
Gelernter's profile may have been boosted by a Scientific American
special issue on Advanced Computing (1987). It featured his experimental
Linda system. It's certainly I first heard of him -- I think it was this
article:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/programming-for-advanced-computi…
And stuff like this wouldn't have hurt either (found just now while
googling the above citation):
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/19/business/david-gelernter-s-romance-with-l…
And, well... in more recent news...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/01/18/david…
--Toby
On Jan 23, 2017, at 2:16 PM, Chuck Guzis
<cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
On 01/23/2017 11:00 AM, Steven Maresca wrote:
I suppose it could. ... Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent
to me by a
colleague, regarding an IBM 7074 supplying data to Java
middleware, ultimately feeding a modern webapp stack:
http://thenewstack.io/happens-use-java-1960-ibm-mainframe/
The 7074 was referred to as a "supercomputer". Can any decimal
machine really bear that title?
Now, get off of my lawn!
--Chuck