> How many times do we have to snicker at some IBM execs quote about the computers that is almost 60 years old.
IBM's comments are totally true, when viewed in context. The context is that, back then, a "computer" was a device to calculate and print a table of sines, cosines and logarithms (to be used for aiming artillery). After printing the trig tables, the single-purpose "computer" would be decommissioned. In that context, the world would not need more than 10 of these single-use devices.
Which is true.
The concept of a general-purpose computer came much later.
> famous prediction by IBM that the
> entire world would only need 10 computers.
At the time that statement was made, a "computer" defined to be a mechanical device to calculate and print trig tables: sines, cosines, logarithms, etc. From that perspective, the statement was correct. Back then, there was no concept of a general-purpose "computer".
Slashdot Mirror
> How many times do we have to snicker at some IBM execs quote about the computers that is almost 60 years old.
IBM's comments are totally true, when viewed in context. The context is that, back then, a "computer" was a device to calculate and print a table of sines, cosines and logarithms (to be used for aiming artillery). After printing the trig tables, the single-purpose "computer" would be decommissioned. In that context, the world would not need more than 10 of these single-use devices.
Which is true.
The concept of a general-purpose computer came much later.
> famous prediction by IBM that the
> entire world would only need 10 computers.
At the time that statement was made, a "computer" defined to be a mechanical device to calculate and print trig tables: sines, cosines, logarithms, etc. From that perspective, the statement was correct. Back then, there was no concept of a general-purpose "computer".