Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
It's funny.  Laugh. Technology

The Most Incorrect Assumptions In Computing? 1496

Posted by timothy
from the this-time-it's-perfect dept.
Miss Muis writes "After reading once again that Moore's Law will become obsolete, I amused myself thinking back to all the predictions, absolutes and impossibles in computing that have been surpassed with ease. In the late 80s I remember it being a well regarded popular 'fact' that 100MHz was the absolute limit for the speed of a CPU. Not too many years later I remember much discussion about hard drives for personal computers being physically unable to go much higher than 1GB. Let's not forget "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers" from the chairman of IBM in 1943, and of course 'Apple is dying...' (for the past 25 years). What are your favorite beliefs-turned-on-their-heads in the history of computing?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Most Incorrect Assumptions In Computing?

Comments Filter:
  • by nanolith (58246) * on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:45PM (#7631732)
    *BSD is Dying...

    Totally untrue. *BSD rules. :-P
    • by jcenters (570494) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @05:46PM (#7633175) Homepage
      With Mac OS X, I guess Apple and BSD can die together!
  • the list (Score:5, Funny)

    by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:45PM (#7631733) Homepage Journal

    640K is enough for anyone. (that one was easy)

    This Internet thing is a fad.

    No one will want to look at a man stretching his bottom wide open.

  • RAM (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ty_Webb (729466) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:46PM (#7631738)
    I swear, this will be the last batch of RAM I'll ever need...
  • by Raul654 (453029) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:46PM (#7631742) Homepage
    ...I predict that within 100 years computers will be twice as powerful, 10,000 times larger, and so expensive that only the five richest kings of Europe will own them. --Prof Frink, Much Apu About Nothing
  • by kneecarrot (646291) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:46PM (#7631752)
    How about the assumption that my $500 graphics card will last at least until next year.

    Right...

  • My favorite (Score:5, Funny)

    by mrpuffypants (444598) * <.mrpuffypants. .at. .gmail.com.> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:47PM (#7631768)
    My favorite bad product assumption is right in its title:

    Microsoft Works
  • by kurosawdust (654754) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:48PM (#7631775)
    people will be thankful to have a anthropomorphic paperclip tell them what to do.
  • Storage Space (Score:5, Informative)

    by kidgenius (704962) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:48PM (#7631778)
    Whenever I get a new harddrive, i invariably say "I'll never be able to fill that up" and somehow within about 2 years time I'm out buying an extra hard drive.
  • by stroustrup (712004) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:48PM (#7631780) Journal
    the worst assumption many of us are making is that humans are not themselves computers.
    About Kurzweil [kurzweilai.net]
    • by russellh (547685) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @05:49PM (#7633210) Homepage
      the worst assumption many of us are making is that humans are not themselves computers.

      It's an interesting intellectual exercise, but the idea that we are merely computers is nothing more than the continued novelty of the computer, just as we once thought of ourselves and the world as clockwork. Wishful thinking, or perhaps professional myopia. Everyone thinks their field is the key to the universe. But this is not theory, so until someone can actually create complex life, I see no reason to believe people like Ray. Show me the money.

  • by ThomasFlip (669988) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:48PM (#7631785)
    Flashing my dual 2.0 ghz g5 hasn't gotten me laid yet, I guess I was wrong !
  • download (Score:4, Informative)

    by mrscorpio (265337) <twoheadedboy AT stonepool DOT com> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:48PM (#7631787)
    Download (supposed) - definition of the transfer of data from any source to another.

    Download (actual) - definition of the transfer of data from an network to your machine.

    Uses:

    1. "I downloaded the software from the CD to my computer."

    2. "I downloaded the file from the internet."

    3. "I downloaded the file into my e-mail and sent it to him."

    Only #2 is correct.

    I had to berate my father for WEEKS before he learned the intricacies of Download vs. Upload vs. Install.

    Chris
    • Re:download (Score:5, Funny)

      by haystor (102186) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:53PM (#7631900)
      Demonstrate with a beer.

      Upload it to the refrigerator.

      Download it from the refrigerator.

      Install it.

      Uninstall it.
    • Re:download (Score:4, Informative)

      by HTH NE1 (675604) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:19PM (#7632278)
      Upload/download also refers to who is initiating the action. If you're pulling network data to you, you are downloading; if you're pushing network data to someone else, you are uploading.

      But if you're downloading data from a site, the site is not also uploading that data to you. The action exists at only one end of the operation, at the initiator of the action.

      The location can be virtual (i.e. using the local machine to log into a remote machine to have the remote machine upload a file to the local machine is uploading, not downloading).

      However, FTP has a (rarely implemented) feature where the controller of the transfer is neither sender nor receiver. One can trasnfer files from one host to another while controlling it from a third, and the data doesn't even pass through the third machine. Is that neither uploading nor downloading, or both? IMO, it is simply transferring.
  • Home Computer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by southpolesammy (150094) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:48PM (#7631792) Journal
    "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home." -- Kenneth Olson, 1977, founder of Digital
    • Re:Home Computer (Score:5, Interesting)

      by arth1 (260657) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:04PM (#7632090) Homepage Journal
      I find the sales arguments for the first hobby computers the worst miss at all. Or is it just me who isn't using the computer to keep track of all my recipes?

      The second worst would be that we would be in a paperless society. Uhm, yeah, unfortunately some shmock invented wysimolwyg PRINTERs too.

      Other than that, I see new predictions fail all the time, and even being reinvented. Who else remembers the "Gorilla Arm Syndrome" of the 80's with touch screens? They were predicted to take over, but that didn't happen. And it ain't happening now either, with the flatbed computers -- touch screens just aren't ergonomic enough for any prolonged use, as most people can't keep their hands in the air for any length of time.
      Same with gyroscopic mice -- they're going the way of the Dodo, despite happy predictions.

      Regards,
      --
      *Art
  • by r_j_prahad (309298) <r_j_prahad AT hotmail DOT com> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:49PM (#7631801)
    Slashdot - News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters?
  • by phillymjs (234426) <slashdot@stCURIEango.org minus physicist> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:49PM (#7631803) Homepage Journal
    "Windows is the best OS because the most people use it."

    ~Philly
  • by gklinger (571901) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:49PM (#7631811)
    "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - Thomas Watson, Chairman, IBM

    "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." - Ken Olsen, Founder, Digital Equipment Corporation

    Or my personal favorite...

    "Trust me, this is way better than OS/2." - The dude at Computer City that sold me my copy of WIndows 95. Bastard.

    • by MisterFancypants (615129) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:20PM (#7632285)
      "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - Thomas Watson, Chairman, IBM

      "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." - Ken Olsen, Founder, Digital Equipment Corporation

      I don't think Watson's quote really fits into these sorts of discussions because the entire nature of what a 'computer' is was entirely different when he said it.

      Olsen's quote, however, is simple lack of vision since he was addressing fairly modern era PCs directly.

      • by T-Ranger (10520) <jeffw@@@chebucto...ns...ca> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:36PM (#7632512) Homepage
        I think in comparing these two quotes, its important to see where their respective companies are now.

        IBM continues to be one of the leading (if not the leader) computer companies, and as a business has been around for more then a century, and has always been profitable. They clearly have recovered from a momentary laps in judgement, which, in historical context can be forgiven.

        DEC, on the other hand.. Well, Olsen was a dumbass, plain and simple. He also is quoted as saying "Unix is snakeoil". What is amazing is not that DEC got swallowed up by Compaq, a companies whose core business is putting computers in peoples homes, but that they managed to survive as long as they did with morons like Olsen at the heml.

  • by Liselle (684663) * <slashdotNO@SPAMliselle.net> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:49PM (#7631815) Journal
    "I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operating system, and possibly program, of all time. As the successor to DOS, which has over 10,000,000 systems in use, it creates incredible opportunities for everyone involved with PCs."

    -- Bill Gates, from "OS/2 Programmer's Guide" (forward by Bill Gates)
  • 9600 baud (Score:4, Interesting)

    by crmartin (98227) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:50PM (#7631818)
    ... is the limit for a voice grade phone line.
  • by DenOfEarth (162699) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:50PM (#7631823) Homepage

    I remember working at a research firm for an internship, and the head of our department said over lunch one day that he actually spent more time dealing with problems he was having with his computer than actually doing any useful work. I've noticed this with myself also, and even though I enjoy figuring out what's going on with my computer, I imagine many people don't. Email and websurfing always suck away my working hours, what with a PC right here on my desk, and not to mention that I get asked to help other people out with their machines every once in a while, it wastes both our time.

    Makes me think though...wasn't it always implied that computers would save peoples time? Has that assumption yet proved that it is indeed true? I'm not so sure it has, although maybe that's because we aren't using the things the right way. Perhaps we are waiting for a computer savvy workforce and then this might be true...but then again, who knows...

    • You're not kidding (Score:5, Interesting)

      by joggle (594025) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @06:58PM (#7633889) Homepage Journal
      I remember reading that it now takes NASA substantially more man-hours to do the same tasks now than before computers were used for design/CAD work. If I remember correctly, it took engineers roughly half the amount of time to design a rocket like the Saturn V than it would today using CAD (Computer Aided Design)! Also, much more paper is used now then back then when all of the drafting was hand-drawn, with typewriters used for everything else. I think they also tended to make fewer mistakes because they were more closely involved in the numbers, not using a potentially buggy black box to help them out.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:50PM (#7631828)
    100MHz was the absolute limit for the speed of a CPU

    Yeah, but that was because your MHz display had only two digits.
  • by briglass (608949) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:50PM (#7631833)
    Check out this article from Ars Technica: http://www.arstechnica.com/wankerdesk/01q2/limits/ limits-1.html

    Entitled "The Ultimate Limits of Computers," it deals with issues including not only Moore's law, but quantum mechanics... such as Plank's constant, Boltzmann's constant, the gravitational constang, the application of quantum mechanics to thermodynamics, and other interesting things that I barely (read: don't) understand.
  • by Alan Livingston (209463) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:52PM (#7631858)

    I remember telling my father once after he had bought a 40Mb hard drive that this should last him forever. Nothing could ever fill up more than this. Of course this was well before the days of .mp3 and .mpg.

    When I was a kid, I remember watching the Jetsons and when George came home from work he coomplained that he had just finished a hard day at work pushing buttons. I remarked to my father that Noone could ever get a job where all they did was push buttons all day. Now, except for the one knob on the 'scope under my desk, all my interfaces to the outside world ARE buttons.

    I guess I'm full of underestimations...

  • My favorite... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wakko Warner (324) * on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:52PM (#7631870) Homepage Journal
    That idiot Bob Metcalfe loves trotting this one out every few years:

    THE INTERNET IS GROWING TOO FAST, AND WILL COLLAPSE UPON ITSELF PRESENTLY.

    I think he just wants everyone to know that he invented Ethernet, and needs to throw this story out there every couple years so people don't forget he actually did accomplish something at some point in time. Like 20 years ago.

    - A.P.
  • One year from now... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zeux (129034) * on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:53PM (#7631873)
    ... we won't need floppy disks anymore.

    It's been ten year that I hear this statement continuously. Last time I broke the MBR on a server without a CD drive, I had no other choice than to boot on a floppy.
    • by rossz (67331) <ogreNO@SPAMgeekbiker.net> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @05:58PM (#7633300) Homepage Journal
      And now it's true. The last two computers I ordered, I specifically said "No floppy drive". One system was for my wife at her work (her company paid for it) and the other was for me (my new server). We both have 128Meg USB drives. Mine is a Laks watch, hers is a conventional type that she calls "the gadget".

      She loves her USB drive. In the past, when she wanted to bring work home (which is very often) she would either put it on a zip disk (which are too damn slow and are not reliable) or burn a CD, which was reliable but took too long. Floppy was out because the file was too big (MS Access database). Now she just drags the file to the "removable drive" icon and she's done. It's USB 2.0 (the fast one -- er, is that fast or high speed?), so it copies damn fast.

      Oh, the system can be booted from USB or CD, so crash recovery is still possible.
  • by DickBreath (207180) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:53PM (#7631880) Homepage
    "Why would anyone want a computer in their home?" -- Ken Olson of DEC in late 1970's regarding personal computers.

    or something to that effect.


    "Whereas computers today weigh 1 ton and require 18,000 vaccum tubes, computers in the future will weigh only 1/2 ton and have under 1,000 vaccum tubes." -- Popular Mechanics, 1949.
  • by CHaN_316 (696929) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:54PM (#7631908)
    and given enough venture capital, an internet start up will be super profitable on the internet even though it has never made a profit, and doesn't have a sound business plan, and has a super inflated stock price.

    But, it does have a great shiny mission statement:

    "It's our responsibility to synergistically provide access to world-class sources as well as to assertively facilitate enterprise-wide opportunities" - Dilbert Mission Statment Generator [dilbert.com]

    (Stock brokers in a flurry) BUY! BUY! BUY! BUY! BUY!
  • Dying ...? (Score:5, Funny)

    by MikeCapone (693319) <skelterhell AT yahoo DOT com> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:55PM (#7631937) Homepage Journal
    So now that Apple uses *BSD, is it dying twice as fast?
  • by sane? (179855) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:56PM (#7631957)
    "We'll have working speech recognition by 1990"

    "You won't have to work, machines will do everything for you."

    Flying Cars !

    Isn't it interesting that the only the failed predictions are the ones that people remember - no matter if they are exceeded or undershot.

    Its almost as if, if you want to be quoted and remembered, you need to make high sounding, but wrong predictions. The more smug the eventual reader, the more notice they take.

    "Microsoft will perfect intelligent software in their next release"

    "SCO will own all Linux IP"

    "The future belongs to Internet companies"

    "Genetic engineering is no more than a passing fad, forgotten by history"

    "President Bush will be recognised by history as a fine president"

    History, here I come.
  • by stylerm (707522) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:57PM (#7631971)
    Its not computers, but in the early 1900, or maybe late 1800, it was believed that the human brain couldnt process all the information necessary to travel over 35 mph. And if you did travel faster than that speed you would go insane. Its a good thing that we have cell phones now, so we can drive whit out abosorbing insane amounts of information from the road.
  • Great Heinlein-ism (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fished (574624) * <amphigory.gmail@com> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:57PM (#7631973)
    This remind me of one of the aphorisms in Heinlein's Time Enough for Love:
    "If an elderly respected expert in a given field tells you that something can be done he is almost certainly right. If an elderly respected expert in a given field tells you that something is impossible, he is almost certainly wrong."
    Just think it, believe it, dream about it and it's real man.
  • by rcastro0 (241450) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @03:59PM (#7632017) Homepage
    Working as a consultant I am faced everyday with what I think is the biggest failed promise:
    That computers would bring about the "paperless office".

    Not only they didn't, but they made people consume more paper than ever before. On top of all the paper spent, the cost of printing pages increased, as industry made us believe that ink jets were better, and B&W laser passee.

    For more discussion see an article in Newsday about it [newsday.com]. There's even a full book dedicated to the question of why the paperless office never came to be [amazon.com].
  • my favorites (Score:5, Interesting)

    by plopez (54068) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:01PM (#7632049) Journal
    The mainframe is dead

    "I don't understand why people would need more than 4gb..." (Bill Gates in an interview on 64 bit ccomputing, in which he said he didn't understand peoples' interest in it)

    XML will replace relational databases

    OOP will lead to more robust, easier to maintain and higher quality software

    By making COBOL resemble English, anyone can program.

  • by kidlinux (2550) <<ten.xobecaps> <ta> <ekud>> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:01PM (#7632054) Homepage
    How about the need for computers in the classroom? That's total BS as far as I'm concerned.

    I've been into computers for quite some time, and am enrolled in Computer Science at university. It's been obvious to me for years that computers in the classroom are a waste of time, energy, and resources for everyone involved.

    I try to tell people this, and they wonder why I say that, given my experience with computers. No doubt it's because the people making the decisions have no clue.

    Most adults on /. likely went through school without computers in the classroom. Did our educations suffer as a result? No. As far as I'm concerned, I was better off in school without a computer.

    Of course, we did have computers at school. Good ol' ICONs, and IBM 8086s. We had typing class a couple times a week, and learned to use a word processor, which is about as far as it needs to go. Leave computers for their own courses in high school (Computer Science and maybe some kind of class for basics.)

    Is it not obvious that more harm is being done than good, when it comes to computers in class? There are just so many things wrong with the whole idea. Perhaps one day when computers become more appliance-like, they'll be more beneficial in class, and will be put to use in such a fashion as to not create dependancies.

    What do you think?
    • Disagree (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 2nd Post! (213333) <gundbear@NoSpam.pacbell.net> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:30PM (#7632419) Homepage
      I wonder if we can have a useful discussion without flames and insults? It is Slashdot after all!

      I think the problem is that computers aren't being used in their strengths: As long as you use computers as fancy notepads and chalkboards, computers are useless in a classroom.

      However, if you cater to their strengths and capabilities, I think computers are invaluable:
      1) Their ability to network and connect classrooms with other locations, such as other classrooms, servers with data such as photographs, maps, and things you can't store in a classroom.

      2) Their ability to virtualize. See things you can't afford to go see, do things you can't afford to go do, teach things you can't afford to otherwise teach! Books, encyclopedias, and videos offer a very static virtual representation, where a computer can be interactive! Not only can you 'see' different animals at various depths of the ocean with a computer (which a video can do just as well), you can *explore* too! Find out what happens at various pressures to your ship, to your body, see how snowflakes form, how ants find food; and then fiddle with a few settings, and see *different* snowflakes, see the ants starve, and see your ship crumple! You can design airplanes, and see if they fly or fall, you can create space stations, and see if your astronauts starve, overheat, or get bored to death!

      3) Interactivity. Very tied to virtualization and networking, you can interact with a computer in a way that you cannot with a video or a book. You can change things, simulate things, watch things, and then go back and change more things. You can have a classroom that happens to have access to a freshwater lake do experiments and research, connected to a classroom that happens to have a database, some programming kids, and a good grasp of math, and at the end of each day each classroom can learn things that before networking neither could!

      4) Data manipulation and storage. You can store lots of photographs, keep tremendous databases, perform tedious analysis, and create pictures out of raw numbers that a child, or even an adult, cannot. Measure the temperature, humidity, rainfall, pressure, cloud cover/sunlight, and wind at 400 locations 10 times a day across a city, and have the kids create programs to access, correlate, and manipulate that data and see if they can spot trends, correlations, and causations!

      So yes, there are reasons to have computers in the classroom. No, right now no one does it properly.
  • Modems. (Score:5, Funny)

    by bellers (254327) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:02PM (#7632064) Homepage
    I remember when I was using a Hayes Smartmodem 300 on my C-64 to dial a BBS up in the 80's, I talked to my sysop friend about some scientists who were working on a 9600-baud modem. My friend was shocked and incredulous:



    ARE THEY OUT OF THEIR MINDS?! THE PHONE LINES WILL BURN UP!

  • Good Times (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gmuslera (3436) * on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:05PM (#7632100) Homepage Journal
    By the times it come out, one of the favorite arguments against it was really a computer virus was "there is no way to automatically being infected with a computer virus simply reading a mail".

    Luckily Microsoft proved that assumption was false.

  • by Doc Squidly (720087) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:05PM (#7632104)
    I have a Mac friend who say his G5 is "faster than the Internet" becuase everytime he opens his browser he gets "a page not found messege" and has to hit the refresh button.
    I keep on telling him that its just a bug and his computer isn't faster than his broadband connection. But, he doesn't beleive me.
  • SAP (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HexaDex (687539) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:06PM (#7632111)
    My fav is when our CFO asserted that when we migrated to SAP "we'd no longer need programmers". The sound you here is dozens of ABAPers laughing all the way to the bank...
  • by diesel_jackass (534880) <travis.hardimanNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:07PM (#7632121) Homepage Journal
    That whole y2k thing was pretty annoying. i could go on at great lengths, but didn't anyone else just set the date on their computer to a date in 2000(+) to see what would happen?

    (proof that fear is the best marketing tool)
  • by TygerFish (176957) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:07PM (#7632122)
    Moore's law is interesting and the immanent demise of Apple certainly so. However, the most interesting thing for me is how curiosity and greed work together to expand the frontiers in computers and what it's brought about.

    True, right now, the yearly, 'we'll-be-helpless-without-faster-computers!' cycle appears to have stopped or slowed down. Big IT buyers seem to have realized that you don't need a machine that could run a weather model to replace a typewriter and that's a real good thing.

    But what about software? I could be wrong. I don't do that much with my computer except surfing and writing, but much of what I see makes me wonder where all the really miraculous power of my computer is going.

    I've got an operating system that takes up non-trivial space on my harddrive and aside from a constant need to keep up with the virus writers, or dealing with stuff to make Microsoft happy, I'm not seeing the bennies.

    You'd think that with all this godawful power, there'd be a little more substance.

  • by wanab12 (110289) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:10PM (#7632151)
    With all the porn on the internet, you'd think there would be a lot more blind men around.
  • MHz Myth (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Alizarin Erythrosin (457981) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:13PM (#7632188)
    That a higher clock speed means a faster processor.
  • by xpromache (542799) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:17PM (#7632243)
    who in 1950 said that in 50 years we will be able to programme computers "to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 per cent chance of making the right identification after five minutes of questioning" 53 years later we are still so incredible far from this. see this [soton.ac.uk] for more details.
  • by HotNeedleOfInquiry (598897) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:19PM (#7632276)
    In the 80's, the Japanese industry/government complex declared a massive project to completely redefine and *own* operating systems and application software.

    Since at the time, they had finished doing just that with consumer electronics industry and were well on the way to doing just that to the automotive industry, most CS types were justifably concerned.

    Well, the rest of the story is that it didn't happen. Not even a whimper of it got over to the western world.

  • Dvorak on the mouse (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rtm1 (560452) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:24PM (#7632341)
    "The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse.' There is no evidence that people want to use these things." (John C. Dvorak, SF Examiner, Feb. 1984.)

  • by Stavr0 (35032) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @04:26PM (#7632375) Homepage Journal
    "With Macrovision we will eliminate bootleg VHS copies once and for all!"

    "With Laserlok we will eliminate software piracy once and for all!"

    "With Cactus Datashield we will eliminate Audio CD ripping once and for all!"

    for each $drm_product
    for each $technology
    "With {$drm_product} we will eliminate {$technology} piracy once and for all!"
    end
    end
  • Leisure society (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nameless Poltroon (141361) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @05:00PM (#7632847)
    "Computers will lead to a leisure society where people have much more free time for personal pursuits and family"

    - my grade 10 high school teacher19 years ago
  • by Ryosen (234440) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @05:37PM (#7633085)
    "File trading is killing the Entertainment industry."
  • by valdis (160799) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @05:49PM (#7633213)
    Keep in mind that when TJ Watson said it, his company was *already* engaged in the sale of semi-programmable card-sorting and tabulating gear, of which they were building a LOT.

    What he *meant* was "There's a market for 5 really high-end machines far and above the rest of the competition". The word "supercomputer" wouldn't be around for a few decades yet. And what do you know? Even today, there's a small handful of machines at the truly high end (currently, above 5 teraflops or so)
  • by SmurfButcher Bob (313810) on Thursday December 04, 2003 @07:17PM (#7634111) Journal
    Windows 1.0 - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a preemptive multitasker!"

    Windows 3.0 - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a preemptive multithreaded multitasker!"

    Windows 3.1 - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a preemptive multithreaded multitasker!"

    Windows 3.11 - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a preemptive 32bit multithreaded multitasker!"

    Windows 95 - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a preemptive multithreaded multitasker!"

    Windows 95OSR2 - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a preemptive multithreaded multitasker!"

    Windows 98 - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a FASTER preemptive multithreaded multitasker!"

    Windows 98SE - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a FASTER preemptive multithreaded multitasker!"

    Windows ME - "Yes! This new version of Windows is a FASTER preemptive multithreaded multitasker!"

    NT 3.5 - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    NT 4 - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    NT 4 SP1 - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    NT 4 SP3 - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    NT 4 SP5 - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    NT 4 SP6 - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    NT 4 SP6A - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    NT 4 SP6ASRP - "Yes! This new version is rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    2K - "Yes! This new version is FASTER! Rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    XP - "Yes! This new version is FASTER! Rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    AS2k2 - "Yes! This new version is FASTER! Rock solid stable, and rock solid secure!"

    Longhorn - "Yes! This new version is Trustworthy(tm)!"

If I'd known computer science was going to be like this, I'd never have given up being a rock 'n' roll star. -- G. Hirst

Working...