Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #5498 > unrolled thread

[OT] Babage and computer history

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  [OT] Babage and computer history "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-09 14:20 -0400
    Re: [OT] Babage and computer history fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 08:33 -0700
    Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2015-07-10 08:50 -0700
      Re: [OT] Babage and computer history "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-10 14:22 -0400
        Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-10 22:03 +0100
          Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2015-07-10 19:49 -0700
          Re: [OT] Babage and computer history "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-10 23:16 -0400
            Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2015-07-10 20:19 -0700
            Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-11 23:19 +0100
              Re: [OT] Babage and computer history "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-12 12:22 -0400
                Re: [OT] Babage and computer history "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-07-17 18:31 -0400
              Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2015-07-12 10:09 -0700
        Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2015-07-10 20:11 -0700
          Re: [OT] Babage and computer history "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-11 14:03 -0400
          Re: [OT] Babage and computer history "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-12 02:22 -0400
            Re: [OT] Babage and computer history Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2015-07-12 10:07 -0700

#5498 — [OT] Babage and computer history

Does anyone know what would ne the newsgroup to post concerning coputer 
history specifically Babbage's difference engine? alt.computers looks 
"unused" and full of spam. I would appreciate it.

Bill

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#5499

W dniu czwartek, 9 lipca 2015 20:20:44 UTC+2 użytkownik Bill Cunningham napisał:
> Does anyone know what would ne the newsgroup to post concerning coputer 
> history specifically Babbage's difference engine? alt.computers looks 
> "unused" and full of spam. I would appreciate it.
> 
> Bill

dont know,
at all which comp or related groups of usenet 
are still mostly populated/active? (I got no easy list of them and coud add some )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5500

On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 7:20:44 PM UTC+1, Bill Cunningham wrote:

> Does anyone know what would ne the newsgroup to post concerning coputer 
> history specifically Babbage's difference engine? alt.computers looks 
> "unused" and full of spam. I would appreciate it.

It depends on what you mean by history.  I'd say comp.programming is OK if your interest is technical (how it worked, the technical conditions and challenges, etc.), but you could try comp.misc if you interest is genuinely historical (socio-political situation, anecdotes, etc.).  Otherwise, what is your interest?

Julio

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5501

"Julio Di Egidio" <julio@diegidio.name> wrote in message 
news:d5f23f7b-21fe-4080-80f9-185586f2fc70@googlegroups.com...
On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 7:20:44 PM UTC+1, Bill Cunningham wrote:

> Does anyone know what would ne the newsgroup to post concerning coputer
> history specifically Babbage's difference engine? alt.computers looks
> "unused" and full of spam. I would appreciate it.

It depends on what you mean by history.  I'd say comp.programming is OK if 
your interest is technical (how it worked, the technical conditions and 
challenges, etc.), but you could try comp.misc if you interest is genuinely 
historical (socio-political situation, anecdotes, etc.).  Otherwise, what is 
your interest?

Julio
http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/

I came across this site that said Babbage never himself got to make is 
difference or analytical engine. That was not my understanding. I thught he 
had a machine and was working with Ada lovelace who was programming. She was 
of course, a mathematician.
    I am wanting to get straight on history. How were they working together 
if he had no machine. Computer history interests me in *all* facets. Early 
machine too were calculators and the "computer" was the person.
Hope that's clear.

Bill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5502

"Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:
<snip>
> http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/
>
> I came across this site that said Babbage never himself got to make is 
> difference or analytical engine. That was not my understanding. I thught he 
> had a machine and was working with Ada lovelace who was programming.

The site you link to matches my recollection of the story and is from an
authoritative source.  The Wikipedia page links to the science museum
that has pretty much the same story so I'm not sure sue what Usenet can
add.  Other than someone having a newly discovered and properly
authenticated Babbage-built difference engine in their basement, why
would to believe what someone might post over two well-respected museum
sites?

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5503

On Friday, July 10, 2015 at 10:03:54 PM UTC+1, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

> Other than someone having a newly discovered and properly
> authenticated Babbage-built difference engine in their basement,

That's quite unlikely: it was as big as a football field...

Julio

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5505

"Ben Bacarisse" <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote in message 
news:87d1zzwwqx.fsf@bsb.me.uk...

> The site you link to matches my recollection of the story and is from an
> authoritative source.  The Wikipedia page links to the science museum
> that has pretty much the same story so I'm not sure sue what Usenet can
> add.  Other than someone having a newly discovered and properly
> authenticated Babbage-built difference engine in their basement, why
> would to believe what someone might post over two well-respected museum
> sites?
http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/overview/

The "Final vindication" seems to clear things up. I guess he built a "small" 
machine. That must have been what Ada was working with. I have read they 
worked together. The larger machine I guess he never saw. Ok then.

Bill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5506

On Saturday, July 11, 2015 at 4:16:27 AM UTC+1, Bill Cunningham wrote:
> "Ben Bacarisse" <b***@bsb.me.uk> wrote in message 
> news:87d1zzwwqx.fsf@bsb.me.uk...
> 
> > The site you link to matches my recollection of the story and is from an
> > authoritative source.  The Wikipedia page links to the science museum
> > that has pretty much the same story so I'm not sure sue what Usenet can
> > add.  Other than someone having a newly discovered and properly
> > authenticated Babbage-built difference engine in their basement, why
> > would to believe what someone might post over two well-respected museum
> > sites?
> http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/overview/
> 
> The "Final vindication" seems to clear things up. I guess he built a "small" 
> machine. That must have been what Ada was working with. I have read they 
> worked together. The larger machine I guess he never saw. Ok then.

OK you are an idiot??  Happy you...

Julio

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5508

"Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:

> "Ben Bacarisse" <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote in message 
> news:87d1zzwwqx.fsf@bsb.me.uk...
>
>> The site you link to matches my recollection of the story and is from an
>> authoritative source.  The Wikipedia page links to the science museum
>> that has pretty much the same story so I'm not sure sue what Usenet can
>> add.  Other than someone having a newly discovered and properly
>> authenticated Babbage-built difference engine in their basement, why
>> would to believe what someone might post over two well-respected museum
>> sites?
> http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/overview/
>
> The "Final vindication" seems to clear things up. I guess he built a "small" 
> machine. That must have been what Ada was working with.

Programming is not about machines -- it's about procedures.  As far as I
know, Ada Lovelace never used any machine of any sort for programming.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5513

"Ben Bacarisse" <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote in message 
news:87lhems5gc.fsf@bsb.me.uk...

> Programming is not about machines -- it's about procedures.  As far as I
> know, Ada Lovelace never used any machine of any sort for programming.

    Oh I see.

Bill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5517

In article <mnu468$mrp$1@dont-email.me>, nospam@nspam.invalid says...
> 
> "Ben Bacarisse" <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote in message 
> news:87lhems5gc.fsf@bsb.me.uk...
> 
> > Programming is not about machines -- it's about procedures.  As far as I
> > know, Ada Lovelace never used any machine of any sort for programming.
> 
>     Oh I see.
> 
> Bill

First, there were two different Babbage concepts, the Difference Engine 
and the Analytical Engine.  The Difference Engine did one thing, it 
calculated polynomials.  The Analytical Engine was to be what we know 
today as a general purpose computer.

Neither was completed in Babbage's lifetime.  At least two all up 
working replicas of the Difference Engine No. 2 design have been built 
since.  Each is about 11 feet long and weighs about 5 tons.

Only small subassemblies of the Analytical Engine were ever constructed. 
Someone currently attempting to raise funding to produce a full scale 
working machine based on the Babbage design says that it will be about 
the size of a small truck.

The basis for the claim that the Countess of Lovelace was the first 
programmer is an annotation she made to a description of the design, in 
which she showed a way to calculate Bernoulli numbers using that 
instruction set.  She never ran code on any machine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5515

On Saturday, July 11, 2015 at 11:19:19 PM UTC+1, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

> Programming is not about machines -- it's about procedures.

Computer science is about procedures.  In production, we know that there is more to programming than just programming, not less.

Julio

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5504

On Friday, July 10, 2015 at 7:22:42 PM UTC+1, Bill Cunningham wrote:
> "Julio Di Egidio" <j***@diegidio.name> wrote in message 
> news:d5f23f7b-21fe-4080-80f9-185586f2fc70@googlegroups.com...
> On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 7:20:44 PM UTC+1, Bill Cunningham wrote:
> 
> > Does anyone know what would ne the newsgroup to post concerning coputer
> > history specifically Babbage's difference engine? alt.computers looks
> > "unused" and full of spam. I would appreciate it.
> 
> It depends on what you mean by history.  I'd say comp.programming is OK if 
> your interest is technical (how it worked, the technical conditions and 
> challenges, etc.), but you could try comp.misc if you interest is genuinely 
> historical (socio-political situation, anecdotes, etc.).  Otherwise, what is 
> your interest?
> 
> Julio
> http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/
> 
> I came across this site that said Babbage never himself got to make is 
> difference or analytical engine. That was not my understanding. I thught he 
> had a machine and was working with Ada lovelace who was programming. She was 
> of course, a mathematician.
>     I am wanting to get straight on history. How were they working together 
> if he had no machine. Computer history interests me in *all* facets.

Ada Lovelace is considered the first programmer in history for her ideas on programming and programmable calculators and for the first explicit use of algorithms.  But she used the calculators that were available at the time to do her experiments, not any programmable ones.  Babbage, who was an engineer, designed the first programmable, i.e. general purpose calculator in history: what we would call a "computer".  But it was mechanico-hydraulic... as big as football stadium: it was never funded.  If you want to know more, go to the library.

> Early 
> machine too were calculators and the "computer" was the person.
> Hope that's clear.

That's wrong: the person is the person and the machine is the machine.  A general purpose computer is a heck of a handy machine, but it does not beat neither the abacus, nor the thermostat, and not even a good solid stick at intelligence tests.

Julio

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5507

"Julio Di Egidio" <julio@diegidio.name> wrote in message 
news:ddc7deef-df16-430b-8739-6f35c4715c1c@googlegroups.com...

Ada Lovelace is considered the first programmer in history for her ideas on 
programming and programmable calculators and for the first explicit use of 
algorithms.  But she used the calculators that were available at the time to 
do her experiments, not any programmable ones.  Babbage, who was an 
engineer, designed the first programmable, i.e. general purpose calculator 
in history: what we would call a "computer".  But it was 
mechanico-hydraulic... as big as football stadium: it was never funded.  If 
you want to know more, go to the library.

> Early
> machine too were calculators and the "computer" was the person.
> Hope that's clear.

That's wrong: the person is the person and the machine is the machine.  A 
general purpose computer is a heck of a handy machine, but it does not beat 
neither the abacus, nor the thermostat, and not even a good solid stick at 
intelligence tests.

Ok the purpose if not clear of this post was just this; discussion of things 
maybe unknown. Now I have read what I've read. Be it this museum site or 
another site. The library, or you or another. Now therefore, who's right or 
wrong. There's either a lot of opinion on this. Or questionable facts.

    What you say about Ada Lovelace  seems pretty universal.

Bill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5509

"Julio Di Egidio" <julio@diegidio.name> wrote in message 
news:ddc7deef-df16-430b-8739-6f35c4715c1c@googlegroups.com...


Ada Lovelace is considered the first programmer in history for her ideas on 
programming and programmable calculators and for the first explicit use of 
algorithms.  But she used the calculators that were available at the time to 
do her experiments, not any programmable ones.  Babbage, who was an 
engineer, designed the first programmable, i.e. general purpose calculator 
in history: what we would call a "computer".  But it was 
mechanico-hydraulic... as big as football stadium: it was never funded.  If 
you want to know more, go to the library.

Go to the library. What library. I have read of the difference and 
anylytical engines. Babbage and other have built them. But I have *never* 
came across anything that said anything was as large as a football field. I 
would certainly like to know your source and library. I have read it's 
"Turning complete" with an "Instruction set" or ISA. Even memory.

Bill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5514

On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 7:22:32 AM UTC+1, Bill Cunningham wrote:

> Go to the library. What library.

The fundamentals of computer history are part of the standard software engineering curriculum, at least in my country, Italy.  In fact, there are connections between Babbage, engineering in Turin, and Olivetti.  So I cannot suggest books for you (i.e. unless you can read Italian), but really any university-level introduction to "informatics" should present at least part of that story, as well as references to dig for more details...

Julio

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web