16 Oct
2008
16 Oct
'08
11:18 a.m.
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, Richard wrote:
TOO LATE. Any
question that starts with "What was the first . . . " is
doomed to it.
>> What
was the first machine to have some sort of graphical display (most
>> likely oscilloscope style) driven by a computer?
. . .
Sorry, no. I don't want this to degenerate into another "but my
pebble stacking box from 1500 BC is the first!" thread. I'm looking
for genuine information along the directions in which I'm asking, not
contorted attempts to turn any arbitrary device by some stretch of the
imagination into a "computer graphics" device.
Then DEFINE what you want. "genuine" is a bogus qualifier.
80 x 24 pixels may not be impressive, but it is still genuinely "a
graphics display".
You will NOT get the discussion that you are looking for until you can
define what you want.
1) Not everybody has the same set of definitions that you do. For
example, many people consider a non-CRT display to still be valid. If you
don't want plotters, then you have to SAY SO. I consider a diablo
micro-spaced graphics produced with the full-stop ("period") arm to be a
graphics display.
"You know what I mean" is NOT valid.
2) We're all a bunch of wise-asses who will look for and find the flaws in
your query.