4 Mar
2013
4 Mar
'13
5:57 p.m.
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
Comparing the the group of students applying for
computer science at the
University of Cambridge in 2005 with those who had applied in 1995 they
noted that there were half as many and that they didn't know how to
program while those in the older group did. This seemed odd given that
the younger generation had grown up in a world where computers were so
much more common,
but the cheapest computers in the first half of the
1980s cost $100 and were practically useless for anything except
programming in Basic
citation, please
$100 did NOt buy you anything that could run CP/M, MS-DOS, Apple-DOS nor
ANY other operating system.
It could be [and often WAS] argued that the cheapest "usable" computer
in the first half of the 1980s was $2000. Compaq got their start by
advertising $2800 V $3800, other clone companies were pushing
$2000 V >$3K for "name brand".
while the cheapest computers in the first half of
the 1990s cost $2000 and didn't have a built-in language, but did have a
huge software library.
citation, please
My MOTHER was able to find a mass-marketed machine with drive and OS for
$500.
While WE would prefer having language in ROM,
by the 1990s, you could run any languages from disk.
Yes, there were things for $100 in the 1980s that could claim to be a
computer.
NO, there were PLENTY of machines in the 1990s well below $1000
You are comparing bottom-of-the-barrel scrapings of 1980s
with upper-end 1990s. The same identical bottom of the barrel still
existed in the 1990s, and the same $2000 had previously existed in the
1980s.
The CHANGE that you claim to observe is simply that in the 1980s, you were
interested in the $100 machines, but in the 1990s, you ignored them, and
refused to acknowledge the existence of anything less than $2000.
The computer market changed MUCH LESS than YOU did.
OTOH, it IS true that over time, more and more crap has been discarded.
There were no computers on the curb on trash day, and now there are.
If you accept the validity of USED stuff, then I can cobble together used
crap with less looking around now than then.
A friend was desperate for an emergency replacement of his laptop.
So, I got FIVE Dell 5150s for $300. Now there is a suitable "internet
terminal" lying around my mothers house for her, family, and friends to
casually use, and some that can be taken to the beach, etc.
(Note: Dell 5100, 5150, 5160, etc. have ABSOLUTELY no relationship to the
machines of the same model numbers from IBM. Well, "5150" still applies
as "a danger to oneself or others", and is a better sounding model number
than "Section 136 of the Mental Health Act")
The $2000 PC was a complete system, while the $100
computer was just the
machine itself, but the comparison isn't totally unfair if you could
find the rest for "free" around the house, like a TV set and a tape
recorder.
What WE have around the house hasn't changed.
You are basing a comparison on what YOU have lying around.
I had video monitors before the TRS80 came out, and I still do.
I could cobble together a machine from DISCARDS then, and I can do it now.
Saying that there is a qualitative difference between then and now is
absurd.
So the point of the Raspberry Pi is to give
today's children
It's ZX80 time.
You CAN do wondrous things.
Or, you can bemoan the "need" for fancier crap.
WHY can't they just say, "it's FUN! and you can cobble together the rest
of what you need to make it usable from the crap that is lying around"
And THAT is fun, too!
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com