13 Oct
2007
13 Oct
'07
12:13 a.m.
On 12 Oct 2007 at 23:02, Brent Hilpert wrote:
I quite agree about the 4004. It may have been first,
but it was one of those
things whose time had come - it really wasn't that big a conceptual leap. Some
time ago I ran across an editorial in a magazine ca. 1969 that basically
summed up the problem: increasing logic density and hence IC complexity (LSI
was on the horizon) would result in an explosion of chip designs that would be
unmanageable (unique design per task,low production runs,etc.).
Check old Datamation and Computerweek issues; I used to read those
religiously and that may be where I saw it. Could also have been in
an IEEE publication.
That was the definitely the buzz in 1969-70; I remember commenting to
an EE prof at a local university that the single-chip monolithic CPU
was just on the horizon. His reaction was one who was being told
that blue M&Ms were just on the horizon. He just didn't get it.
When I left CDC for the grand world of microprocessors, Neil Lincoln
(the architect of the not-yet-envisioned ETA-10) had me flown to
Arden Hills to talk some sense into me. After spending most of a day
tagging around with him being shown the great projects on the drawing
board, he sat down and said: "So you're leaving supercomputers for
MICROCOMPUTERS? Really?" I told him that I'd seen the future and he
confessed that he'd just bought a Commodore Pet. I told him that I'd
had an MITS Altair since 1975.
Cheers,
Chuck