The Future of Computing 1983 Style



In 1983 many people were discovering home computing for the first time. This book was unearthed recently and found to have some pretty accurate predictions for the future of computing.


Best of all though is the section on the history and future of computing. As with all computing histories, the emphasis is on how quickly things have progressed, with plenty of laughter at how ENIAC could carry out a calculation in three millionths of a second, while the 1980s machines could to it in one ten-millionth of a second. To put that into context, while the 1980s machine was thirty times faster than its 1945 counterpart, today’s fastest supercomputer is something like 260 million times faster than the 1980s model described in the book.

Link

Comments (5)

Newest 5
Newest 5 Comments

These days everyone is pro. I was hired as a general assistant to the Technology Operations department of my work. I worked with them temporarily off and on for a year while we rolled out new hosting environments in Toronto, Chicago and Los Angeles. During that time I was asked to work on the VPs desktop. I was told that it had a memory error and I should try replacing the physical memory (RAM). The person giving the instruction was the full-time desktop support technician. I formatted and re-installed windows several times, tried different RAM slots and expansion cards, I even performed a full test of the physical memory using Hiren's Boot CD. Still, not working; Blue-Screen of Death error 0x0000020. I pull this little slip of paper out of a box of cds that came with the PC and one reads "Virtual Memory Error". Out of curiosity I pull up error 0x00000020 online and find it relates to swap file. So I run scandisk to check for bad sectors, found a few and the computer worked perfectly. However, the Tech wasn't happy with me, it took me a few hours and when I told him "That's because you said it was a physical memory problem, not virtual memory, and you told me to troubleshoot the RAM" he got really upset. I got let go a few days after I fixed a brand new monitor he was prepared to toss out. I fixed it by draining the capacitors - a relatively simple fix any tech should know about. I was "let go" due to incompetence. It is ironic that 3 months later they launched an internal investigation to see if I had hacked the Linux servers. Still, rumor is that I was let go for incompetence and the Tech who jerked me over is still here. I don't say anything, it's their company, their loss. But none of it will change the fact that I can fix monitors he can't and that I know the difference between physical and virtual memory. He may have won his career from me, but he's still ignorant, self-centered and deluded. Where is teh handbook on that?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Argh stop referring to 1983 as though it was concurrent with the Roman Invasion! I already feel old!

14 in 1983 here though I was stuck with a Dragon 32 (which I still have).
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
FYI, I put some scans of another Usborne book on my blog, if people are interested:

http://blakeyrat.com/2010/07/the-future-according-to-the-usborne-guide-to-audio-and-radio/

http://blakeyrat.com/2011/06/usborne-guide-to-audio-and-radio-radio-instructions/
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The rule I've found more useful is "When two vowels go walking, the second one does the talking." By and large, the second of two consecutive vowels contributes its sound more than the first.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I gave up on silly rhyming schemes to learn correct spelling a long time ago, due to this ie/C thing. I decided to just learn the words themselves, and that worked feni...er, fine.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Running some numbers on a 60,000 word dictionary with word-counts for each word (in millions) (e.g.

Counts for words you'd goof if you use the i-before-e... rule:

Counts for words with cie: 146

Counts for words with not C ei: 394

Counts for words you'd get correct:

Words with cei: 73

Not c ie: 1,836

These numbers change if you know to never begin a word with ie nor end a word with eis. (Exceptions to this are very, very rare.)

The words "their" and "being" count for 154, so if you remember them, you're in pretty good shape with the rule. Right: 2063. Wrong: 386.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Or, the could just teach them the whole poem, which is always useful when spelling those tricky words: i before e except after c OR WHEN SOUNDING AN A AS IN NEIGHBOR OR WEIGH.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Sammy - I think you learnt the one I did -

i before e except after c, or when said like 'a' such as neighbour and weigh.

Alas the rule never explained the exception for weird xD

The rule might not be entirely correct, but it's still a good basis to teach primary school kids in my opinion. The amount of atrocious spelling I see from my 20-something friends is more than enough proof of that in my opinion.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I learned the rhyme a little different:

I before I, when sounded as 'e', except after 'c'

It's worked well for me over the years since I went to school
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I would never even consider the rule for words like veil or sufficient; I think the "words with ee sound" is understood. And it still helps for those words that it DOES work for.

But if you are going to misuse the rule for veil and sufficient, you are probably going to have some issues with spelling anyway.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
bud:
You say the rule helps for the word that it works for, but that precludes that everyone knows what words it works for and what words it doesn't. What's the point of having the rule if we all have to memorize what words are applicable?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
English is a very difficult language. Receive vs weigh vs weird. It seems that every rule has an exception. That's why I always have a dictionary handy.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
It's a general rule for introductory words rooted in the English language that serves as the first rung. Eventually it sinks in that there are other words that don't follow the song– most other words; but it's just a song. You don't take away a childhood, educational song about colors because it doesn't cover all of the colors either. This is impudent and uncool. As a mostly british gentleman, I want you to know that I don't support this in the least bit. It's not like I go to spell a word that I know doesn't follow the rule, and then think to myself– "Yeah...but the song said that it was–".

This is just plain silly. There's a reason this story is being posted in the 'Oddly Enough' sections of the world, and it's because you have to ask "What do they care?" Ban a miniature children's rhyme.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Seize the weird ancient Raleigh scientist being.
So their...I mean, there!
There are many others, but jeez, add this to the recent move to drop apostrophes, and you're really increasing the chances of being misunderstood.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The FULL rule, as I learnt it, is:

"'i' before 'e' except after 'c' when it rhymes with 'me'."

I have yet to find any exception to this rule. The reason for the failure is the problem that many people did not learn the full version of the rule and many teachers were ignorant of the full version.

I was taught the full rule by my Mother who was a licensed Teacher with many years experience and I myself am a Trained Primary School teacher.

When I was in the Fourth Grade of my primary school I pointed out the full rule to the teacher who had never heard it before. She then tried to list may of te words that did not follow the shortened rule and became very upset, and almost abusive, when I pointed out that none of her extensive list rhymed with 'me'.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Lan3-- “When two vowels go walking, the second one does the talking” may not be a perfect rule for English words, this is a great rule for remembering how to pronounce German words (especially German last names) which often have "ie" or "ei" and which always seem to cause confusion!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
While I enjoy that Brits spell "color" as "colour" (and the spell checker on this site doesn't like "colour") it's understandable that they have problems spelling. Consider these words: learnt for learned, burnt for burned, towards for toward. Most people these days have difficulty spelling or speaking. People use words that don't even exist such as lent for loaned.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
"Lent" is indeed a word. It is the past participle of "lend".

Definition
lent (LEND)
past simple and past participle of lend

eg I lent her my handkerchief.

Learnt is the past simple and past participle of learn.

eg He learnt his lesson.

"Learned" is defined thus:
learned
adjective FORMAL
describes someone who has studied for a long time and has a lot of knowledge:

eg a learned professor

From Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary.

The other words you cited fall into the same category. Americans attempt to distort the language but for reference you should always consult an English, English dictionary if you are going to complain about the use of allegedly, non-existent words. Especially as this topic is about the English not the Americans.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I disagree vehemently with the idea that the rule has so many exceptions that it is not worth teaching. Where the i/e combination forms a dipthong, it should be obvious to anyone who pronounces the word correctly which combination is required. The base rhyme "I before E after 'C' and in words which sound like 'A,' ... like neighbor, weigh, etc" covers most of the common words. The remaining exceptions are easily memorized. At least I have found this to be the case in American English. If we have completely succumbed to the sloth tendency that any pronunciation and definition is acceptable, then I stand corrected. {;^D)
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Email This Post to a Friend
"The Future of Computing 1983 Style"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More