Computer Inventor Finds Computers "Annoying"

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
He could use Asus' Express Gate. It doesn't take hardly any time to boot up and he could still read his emails.
 
The computer is useless, I don;t know why whould any one use a computer
 
Very few people use computers to gain - 00 for most people it's just a waste of time like for 99% of us. ha ha
 
^whoa this is not to say in anyway that computers are useless, I can't believe I just read that.

I think a little re-invention anywhere isn't a bad thing. (or at least a good attempt)
 
That's why ARM based computers are the future of mass computing. It's basically 'back to the roots', when Smarbooks gonna hit the market and hopefully succeed we will see the raise of different form factors maybe also oldschool computer within a keyboard. System on a Chip is a way to go!
 
It's perfectly understandable. The guy paved the way for some standard but it did not go as he foresaw. It's just like if you have have a really good company that work on solid a solid foundation but then get sold into pieces and they all go with different design. With all the licensing crap that goes on, the computer industry should be way beyond what it is today and we should not have to deal with the crap like SLI licensing and such.
 
"I'd much prefer someone would telephone me if they want to communicate," he said. "No, it's not sheer laziness – I just don't want to be distracted by the whole process. Nightmare."
Click to expand...

I find it funny that he finds emails themselves distracting yet he uses his assisstant to read them outloud... because thats not distracting or time consuming in the least...

Though if he made another PC I'd be more than happy to read about it and possibly try it.
 
Inventor of the PC? I think I would designate Steve Wozniak with that honor, but I guess you have to make it sound good somehow... Oh, and this guy seems like an idiot.
 
Oh shizzle the "Add an URL" button removed my URL.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/09/magazines/fortune/cubicle_howiwork_fortune/

*trashes his cubicle*
 
He maybe the inventor of computers, but they do far more now than he ever invisioned. The Pc
now is far more complicated and requires a totally different mindset. The Pc he made was practiacally
useless, but his idea was terrific.

 
I think the comment about the phone makes sense, in that you have to constantly check your e-mail, as opposed to the phone rings you. People spend hours a day looking at their crack berries, you don't spend hours a day looking at your phone waiting for it to ring. Unless, in fact, someone you want to hear from.

I get the logic, I personally, am coming to hate this super connected world, it's like an electron forced to share it's orbit, it's just not good. YOu don't ever seem to have a moment to yourself through this constant flood of information, the TV, radio, cell phone, smart phone, black berry, berry black, phone i, i pad, i pod, you are always connected, constantly, it's like the Borg, ... or that Japan Anime Serial Experiments Lane, social networking will morph into reality and the real world, essentially becomes just a back drop to living on the net.

It's actually quite scary. My most peaceful moments now a days are when no one can contact me, it's damn near exhilirating...

And look at Tiger, if it wasn't for that darn, Text messaging!!!
 
Asynchronous computing is the way to go. Computers should just load the programs we want without background wastes, unless we want a program to run in a background.
 
First of all, he invented A computer, not THE computer. Secondly, the Sinclair was a toy... a hobbiest computer at best (not that the Z80 processor wasn't a decent piece of hardware). Third, back in his day memory was extremely expensive and computer didn't have very much of it. It was necessary to take compiled programs and have assembly language experts thoroughly optimize them. They were relatively small and didn't do much. Today, software coding is a major undertaking. With the complexity of the applications and all of the features they incorporate, it takes nothing less than a small team working full time to put out anything of note. With computers having memory in the gigabytes, you code for performance, not size. Finally, if this guy had been a major player in the computer revolution, I suspect his outlook would be considerable different (sour grapes).

Bottom line: this guy is 20 computer generations out of date and his opinions reflect that.
 
It's true about the attention thing, stupid mail and stuff.

The abuse of 'we'll patch it later' of internet and constant connectivity has also made a lot of stuff worse. People aren't forced to deliver something solid on the first run. (I'm talking especially about software and web pages.)
The efficiency is debatable, I'll trade efficiency for stuff like abstraction (e.g. higher programming language) that allows me to write code faster, I'll take the downside of compiling as a necessity and live with it. Also cross-platform (languages such as Java) is something I'm willing to trade in some efficiency.
For the rest, what does he means with abusing memory? It's actually mainly Microsoft that's doing it. With their crappy allocators and designs. If you compare that to a good Linux, you'll notice a huge difference in efficiency.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom