OT: people don't understand computers anymore
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century" - don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example. It's a subject relevant to vintage computing, because that affects what we are obliged to tell people, to explain, when showing our vintage systems. It's also relevant, because one reason to preserve and operate these vintage systems, is to SHOW how these things worked, to preserve by example their fundamental nature and approach to computing (personal or otherwise). It's a preservation of a level of direct knowledge, which was necessary "then", but not necessary "now". Evidence for "now": recently, someone contacted me as part of my vintage-Mac services, with a vague request. Something close to "I'm trying to read and edit a file from a 1994 Mac, in an obsolete file format from vintage publishing software. Can you help me open and reformat that file?" It took three or so emails, to get the particulars, which are easy to describe either as hardware or software (IDE hard drive, 6300 model Mac, Aldus Pagemaker 6). At some point, some "technical service" told this person they could "read the file from the hard drive" - yet this person couldn't say if they HAD the file on "their PC". Or even clearly say they had a Windows PC or a Mac PC. I had to keep asking questions to get these basics. Why? Because they are no longer active questions. "Everyone" uses Windows (a few use Macs, some use Linux, but context quickly establishes which). Those OS's do everything by magic now, little user intervention needed. Even the computer dealers (by my experience) don't know "how" they work, they just work. On hardware, "if it fits, it works". Many people don't know how to find a file through a file directory (desktop folders); the programs "know" where they are. These people get lost, even doing backups. I think that's pretty fundamental. Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers". That's my experience today. I get this a lot. Again - I'm not looking for a discussion that rags on "today's computer users are idiots". That's not the point. the point is, what do we as vintage computer demonstrators do, when confronted with such people, who look at our systems? Also: I appreciate I have a point of view, not shared by all vintage computer owners. Some may see their stuff, as say "neat gaming systems that we all enjoyed at a similar time in our lives" and simply want to operate them with others who share that same experience. Whether the game is downloaded from the Internet or from an original ROM cartridge is irrelevant. Or, maybe, played on an emulator. I'm aware of that point of view. If those with such interests, have parallel experience with "people today don't appreciate 1990's video games", that would be informative to me, in this discussion. OK? These are real questions of real interest to me. How do we do, what we do with vintage computers, in this context? This is not a rag-on-morons gripe session. OK? Herb Johnson with a point of view retrotechnology.com -- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net
Having grown up in the early 8-bit era and wanting to share the experience with my children, this is something I think about often. I liken the general lack of knowledge about the inner working of computers to the general lack of knowledge of automobile internals. in the first half of the century, it behooved you to have a very good working knowledge of your car so that you could keep it running in any kind of good order. It was easier then, as engines, suspensions and electrical systems were vastly simpler, and anyone with a modicum of mechanical aptitude and desire could do most routine maintenance and repairs. Todays vehicles are an order of magnitude more complex with virtually unserviceable electronic systems controlling virtually every aspect of the car. So in defense of users, they shouldn't have to know the intimate details of the car if they just want to drive. And much the same, users should not need to know the inner workings of computers if they have tasks to complete. This is the goal that programmers, user interface and human factors engineers have been striving for years. Now we finally have it, at the cost of a loss of interest of what's going on under the hood. The upside is computing power for everyone. The downside is reliance on operating systems that increasingly obfuscate the interface between the user and the hardware. It's just a shame that many CS programs don't go further into teaching the fundamentals of computer science and instead begin by concentrating directly on high-level languages, data structures and algorithms; surely important, but it skips the foundation that helps build deeper knowledge. My son Drew, who has been exposed to the bare-metal technology, has expressed this frustration, which I why I suggested he double major in EE. My way of helping then, is to educate whenever I am inevitably called for technical help or asked about my hobby. I try to explain in the most basic terms, starting with the most fundamental concepts, and also communicate the vital importance of preserving the history. Rather than being seen as pedantic, it is often genuinely appreciated. The person now has had the veil of mystery at least partially lifted and it makes them a bit more patient when they encounter issues and gives them a sense of empowerment over the machines they rely on so much (and has the side benefit of reducing future calls!) On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century" - don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
It's a subject relevant to vintage computing, because that affects what we are obliged to tell people, to explain, when showing our vintage systems. It's also relevant, because one reason to preserve and operate these vintage systems, is to SHOW how these things worked, to preserve by example their fundamental nature and approach to computing (personal or otherwise). It's a preservation of a level of direct knowledge, which was necessary "then", but not necessary "now".
Evidence for "now": recently, someone contacted me as part of my vintage-Mac services, with a vague request. Something close to "I'm trying to read and edit a file from a 1994 Mac, in an obsolete file format from vintage publishing software. Can you help me open and reformat that file?"
It took three or so emails, to get the particulars, which are easy to describe either as hardware or software (IDE hard drive, 6300 model Mac, Aldus Pagemaker 6). At some point, some "technical service" told this person they could "read the file from the hard drive" - yet this person couldn't say if they HAD the file on "their PC". Or even clearly say they had a Windows PC or a Mac PC.
I had to keep asking questions to get these basics. Why? Because they are no longer active questions. "Everyone" uses Windows (a few use Macs, some use Linux, but context quickly establishes which). Those OS's do everything by magic now, little user intervention needed. Even the computer dealers (by my experience) don't know "how" they work, they just work. On hardware, "if it fits, it works". Many people don't know how to find a file through a file directory (desktop folders); the programs "know" where they are. These people get lost, even doing backups.
I think that's pretty fundamental.
Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers".
That's my experience today. I get this a lot. Again - I'm not looking for a discussion that rags on "today's computer users are idiots". That's not the point. the point is, what do we as vintage computer demonstrators do, when confronted with such people, who look at our systems?
Also: I appreciate I have a point of view, not shared by all vintage computer owners. Some may see their stuff, as say "neat gaming systems that we all enjoyed at a similar time in our lives" and simply want to operate them with others who share that same experience. Whether the game is downloaded from the Internet or from an original ROM cartridge is irrelevant. Or, maybe, played on an emulator. I'm aware of that point of view. If those with such interests, have parallel experience with "people today don't appreciate 1990's video games", that would be informative to me, in this discussion.
OK? These are real questions of real interest to me. How do we do, what we do with vintage computers, in this context? This is not a rag-on-morons gripe session. OK?
Herb Johnson with a point of view retrotechnology.com
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net
Dean, I Appreciate your analogy with cars. I share those experiences. On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:22 PM, Dean Notarnicola via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote: Having grown up in the early 8-bit era and wanting to share the experience with my children, this is something I think about often. I liken the general lack of knowledge about the inner working of computers to the general lack of knowledge of automobile internals. in the first half of the century, it behooved you to have a very good working knowledge of your car so that you could keep it running in any kind of good order. It was easier then, as engines, suspensions and electrical systems were vastly simpler, and anyone with a modicum of mechanical aptitude and desire could do most routine maintenance and repairs. Todays vehicles are an order of magnitude more complex with virtually unserviceable electronic systems controlling virtually every aspect of the car. So in defense of users, they shouldn't have to know the intimate details of the car if they just want to drive. And much the same, users should not need to know the inner workings of computers if they have tasks to complete. This is the goal that programmers, user interface and human factors engineers have been striving for years. Now we finally have it, at the cost of a loss of interest of what's going on under the hood. The upside is computing power for everyone. The downside is reliance on operating systems that increasingly obfuscate the interface between the user and the hardware. It's just a shame that many CS programs don't go further into teaching the fundamentals of computer science and instead begin by concentrating directly on high-level languages, data structures and algorithms; surely important, but it skips the foundation that helps build deeper knowledge. My son Drew, who has been exposed to the bare-metal technology, has expressed this frustration, which I why I suggested he double major in EE. My way of helping then, is to educate whenever I am inevitably called for technical help or asked about my hobby. I try to explain in the most basic terms, starting with the most fundamental concepts, and also communicate the vital importance of preserving the history. Rather than being seen as pedantic, it is often genuinely appreciated. The person now has had the veil of mystery at least partially lifted and it makes them a bit more patient when they encounter issues and gives them a sense of empowerment over the machines they rely on so much (and has the side benefit of reducing future calls!) On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century" - don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
It's a subject relevant to vintage computing, because that affects what we are obliged to tell people, to explain, when showing our vintage systems. It's also relevant, because one reason to preserve and operate these vintage systems, is to SHOW how these things worked, to preserve by example their fundamental nature and approach to computing (personal or otherwise). It's a preservation of a level of direct knowledge, which was necessary "then", but not necessary "now".
Evidence for "now": recently, someone contacted me as part of my vintage-Mac services, with a vague request. Something close to "I'm trying to read and edit a file from a 1994 Mac, in an obsolete file format from vintage publishing software. Can you help me open and reformat that file?"
It took three or so emails, to get the particulars, which are easy to describe either as hardware or software (IDE hard drive, 6300 model Mac, Aldus Pagemaker 6). At some point, some "technical service" told this person they could "read the file from the hard drive" - yet this person couldn't say if they HAD the file on "their PC". Or even clearly say they had a Windows PC or a Mac PC.
I had to keep asking questions to get these basics. Why? Because they are no longer active questions. "Everyone" uses Windows (a few use Macs, some use Linux, but context quickly establishes which). Those OS's do everything by magic now, little user intervention needed. Even the computer dealers (by my experience) don't know "how" they work, they just work. On hardware, "if it fits, it works". Many people don't know how to find a file through a file directory (desktop folders); the programs "know" where they are. These people get lost, even doing backups.
I think that's pretty fundamental.
Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers".
That's my experience today. I get this a lot. Again - I'm not looking for a discussion that rags on "today's computer users are idiots". That's not the point. the point is, what do we as vintage computer demonstrators do, when confronted with such people, who look at our systems?
Also: I appreciate I have a point of view, not shared by all vintage computer owners. Some may see their stuff, as say "neat gaming systems that we all enjoyed at a similar time in our lives" and simply want to operate them with others who share that same experience. Whether the game is downloaded from the Internet or from an original ROM cartridge is irrelevant. Or, maybe, played on an emulator. I'm aware of that point of view. If those with such interests, have parallel experience with "people today don't appreciate 1990's video games", that would be informative to me, in this discussion.
OK? These are real questions of real interest to me. How do we do, what we do with vintage computers, in this context? This is not a rag-on-morons gripe session. OK?
Herb Johnson with a point of view retrotechnology.com
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net
I like the car analogy as well. The only reasons I can think of that anyone should care how computer works is for efficiency of either electricity or human effort to complete a task. Outside of those things it seems trying to explain computers to average citizens is like explaining physics to a fish to help it swim. Ben On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:36 PM, Christian Liendo via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
I liken the general lack of knowledge about the inner working of computers to the general lack of knowledge of automobile internals
Thank you I was going to use the same analogy.
On 06/07/2016 01:22 PM, Dean Notarnicola via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Having grown up in the early 8-bit era and wanting to share the experience with my children, this is something I think about often. I liken the general lack of knowledge about the inner working of computers to the general lack of knowledge of automobile internals. in the first half of the century, it behooved you to have a very good working knowledge of your car so that you could keep it running in any kind of good order. It was easier then, as engines, suspensions and electrical systems were vastly simpler, and anyone with a modicum of mechanical aptitude and desire could do most routine maintenance and repairs. Todays vehicles are an order of magnitude more complex with virtually unserviceable electronic systems controlling virtually every aspect of the car. So in defense of users, they shouldn't have to know the intimate details of the car if they just want to drive. And much the same, users should not need to know the inner workings of computers if they have tasks to complete. This is the goal that programmers, user interface and human factors engineers have been striving for years. Now we finally have it, at the cost of a loss of interest of what's going on under the hood. The upside is computing power for everyone.
Agreed 100%. The big problem we have, though, is that people have lost sight of what knowledge is necessary to write software (not throw it together, but WRITE it) effectively and efficiently. They know they've lost sight of it, and they think that's fine. The other problem is that we still call them "computers". Yes, of course that's what they are, but then so are our phones, and our air conditioners' remote controls, and most everything else. What most people sit in front of nowadays are terminals, simple communications devices which do little other than browse the WWW on any given day. If it's not that, it's running games, turning a complex very capable machine into a toy. In short, very few people COMPUTE with computers anymore. That's not a problem, of course...but still calling them "computers" rather than "terminals" or "toys" confuses people and affects their thinking. If you "know computers" that might mean you "can browse the WWW" or you "can play with toys". It very rarely means that you actually "know computers". -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
This is a very long rant. Feel free to nod off or delete it at any time :-) First, best reply so far to this thread: "I really wish more folks understood a bit more about physics though, too many attempt to occupy the same space at the same time. ;-)" Now.... My 10 cents (too long to be considered 2 cents!)
Agreed 100%. The big problem we have, though, is that people have lost sight of what knowledge is necessary to write software (not throw it together, but WRITE it) effectively and efficiently. They know they've lost sight of it, and they think that's fine.
If this topic were just about people working in "computing fields" (pick hardware, software, whatever) the above comment fits the whole conversation. However, seems we are mixing and matching throughout this conversation to apply to all people who USE computers in all walks of life. Then we have to pick and choose which group a given comment applies to. The above has nothing, IMO, to do with the average person/consumer (and I don't think it was meant to....just trying to (poorly!) make a point) so we move to the next (not picking on any one persons comments, just was a wide ranging post good for quoting!)
The other problem is that we still call them "computers". Yes, of course that's what they are, but then so are our phones, and our air conditioners' remote controls, and most everything else. What most people sit in front of nowadays are terminals, simple communications devices which do little other than browse the WWW on any given day. If it's not that, it's running games, turning a complex very capable machine into a toy. I disagree with this generalization. My business is boats. Fishing boats and riverboats. Yet we have a word processor, quick books and page layout (used to be pagemaker, now it's indesign) running all day nearly every day.
At home I use photoshop, indesign and a couple web design programs nearly as much as my web browser. Again, the comment applies only to specific groups of people, again IMO, as opposed to people in general.
In short, very few people COMPUTE with computers anymore. That's not a problem, of course...but still calling them "computers" rather than "terminals" or "toys" confuses people and affects their thinking. If you "know computers" that might mean you "can browse the WWW" or you "can play with toys". It very rarely means that you actually "know computers".
Terminals or toys would apply again only to certain groups. The fact that I also use my computer as a toy when I can is but one part of using all or as much of its capability. Do some people pretty much ONLY browse the web? Sure. But for those people that's what a computer is SUPPOSED TO DO. Again, for those people. Speaking as a user (while I programmed back in the day and I use Java and lua and others (albeit not very well) today, I have never considered myself a programmer. Never. ) I'm a user, or perhaps a "power user" in that I am the guy my friends and family refer to as "tech support." The average person would have never owned and wouldn't own a computer to this very day if they were still build your own have to solder and tweak etc etc. People had that opportunity back in the day. Guess what, they didn't want it! Some Of us did, but we were then, are now and likely always will be in the extreme minority. Someone in my world (user) who "knows computers" is someone who knows the software, the operating system, the basics of hardware (in today's world that's knowing the different connections really!) That's me to my friends and family. I am lucky in that I also have the old school technical knowledge, even though it is at a novice level compared to many of you. Back then I was a user, who liked to tinker as long as it didn't explode mom and dads hard earned money sitting there on the desk in its beautiful beige box. I ran a board for ten years, knew baud, swapped cards etc. I was elated when I got my first Mac. No more spending time on things to make it work. I needed it to "just work" because the computer for me, like most all the people I know, is a tool. An appliance. It's a toaster. It's a microwave. But it is so much more without having to know HOW and WHY it's a toaster and a microwave and a tv and and and all in one. 99% of the people never have and never will know how to fix a car, or even a bike. If they did, they wouldn't have one. My daily life requirements preclude me from having the time to learn all the things I'd like to. While I certainly know more than my friends and family do about computers, and my 8 bit habit goes a little further, in the end I'm a user. I don't need an ee degree to use word, Photoshop, indesign, dreamweaver, quickbooks. When shit breaks on my boats that I cannot fix I don't get pissed or lament the fact that I didn't become a diesel mechanic AND a boat captain, I call out diesel mechanic guy. (Mitch actually) my crew says "aren't you upset?" I say, "No, that's why God invented mechanics!" Now if the lament is about how piss poor today's new mechanics are?? Oh yeah, that conversation can be had about a lot of topics including computers!! All depends on the group of people we are discussing. Tony
A very short response to your very long rant: "Yes, I agree 100%." :) Someone who uses a wrench shouldn't have to know the finer points of wrench DESIGN. They should just know how to use one safely and effectively. It really does depend on who we're talking about. My comments were speaking particularly to software developers. -Dave On 06/07/2016 03:30 PM, Tony Bogan via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
This is a very long rant. Feel free to nod off or delete it at any time :-)
First, best reply so far to this thread:
"I really wish more folks understood a bit more about physics though, too many attempt to occupy the same space at the same time. ;-)"
Now.... My 10 cents (too long to be considered 2 cents!)
Agreed 100%. The big problem we have, though, is that people have lost sight of what knowledge is necessary to write software (not throw it together, but WRITE it) effectively and efficiently. They know they've lost sight of it, and they think that's fine.
If this topic were just about people working in "computing fields" (pick hardware, software, whatever) the above comment fits the whole conversation. However, seems we are mixing and matching throughout this conversation to apply to all people who USE computers in all walks of life. Then we have to pick and choose which group a given comment applies to. The above has nothing, IMO, to do with the average person/consumer (and I don't think it was meant to....just trying to (poorly!) make a point) so we move to the next (not picking on any one persons comments, just was a wide ranging post good for quoting!)
The other problem is that we still call them "computers". Yes, of course that's what they are, but then so are our phones, and our air conditioners' remote controls, and most everything else. What most people sit in front of nowadays are terminals, simple communications devices which do little other than browse the WWW on any given day. If it's not that, it's running games, turning a complex very capable machine into a toy. I disagree with this generalization. My business is boats. Fishing boats and riverboats. Yet we have a word processor, quick books and page layout (used to be pagemaker, now it's indesign) running all day nearly every day.
At home I use photoshop, indesign and a couple web design programs nearly as much as my web browser. Again, the comment applies only to specific groups of people, again IMO, as opposed to people in general.
In short, very few people COMPUTE with computers anymore. That's not a problem, of course...but still calling them "computers" rather than "terminals" or "toys" confuses people and affects their thinking. If you "know computers" that might mean you "can browse the WWW" or you "can play with toys". It very rarely means that you actually "know computers".
Terminals or toys would apply again only to certain groups. The fact that I also use my computer as a toy when I can is but one part of using all or as much of its capability. Do some people pretty much ONLY browse the web? Sure. But for those people that's what a computer is SUPPOSED TO DO. Again, for those people. Speaking as a user (while I programmed back in the day and I use Java and lua and others (albeit not very well) today, I have never considered myself a programmer. Never. ) I'm a user, or perhaps a "power user" in that I am the guy my friends and family refer to as "tech support." The average person would have never owned and wouldn't own a computer to this very day if they were still build your own have to solder and tweak etc etc. People had that opportunity back in the day. Guess what, they didn't want it! Some Of us did, but we were then, are now and likely always will be in the extreme minority.
Someone in my world (user) who "knows computers" is someone who knows the software, the operating system, the basics of hardware (in today's world that's knowing the different connections really!)
That's me to my friends and family. I am lucky in that I also have the old school technical knowledge, even though it is at a novice level compared to many of you. Back then I was a user, who liked to tinker as long as it didn't explode mom and dads hard earned money sitting there on the desk in its beautiful beige box. I ran a board for ten years, knew baud, swapped cards etc. I was elated when I got my first Mac. No more spending time on things to make it work. I needed it to "just work" because the computer for me, like most all the people I know, is a tool. An appliance. It's a toaster. It's a microwave. But it is so much more without having to know HOW and WHY it's a toaster and a microwave and a tv and and and all in one.
99% of the people never have and never will know how to fix a car, or even a bike. If they did, they wouldn't have one. My daily life requirements preclude me from having the time to learn all the things I'd like to. While I certainly know more than my friends and family do about computers, and my 8 bit habit goes a little further, in the end I'm a user. I don't need an ee degree to use word, Photoshop, indesign, dreamweaver, quickbooks.
When shit breaks on my boats that I cannot fix I don't get pissed or lament the fact that I didn't become a diesel mechanic AND a boat captain, I call out diesel mechanic guy. (Mitch actually) my crew says "aren't you upset?"
I say, "No, that's why God invented mechanics!"
Now if the lament is about how piss poor today's new mechanics are?? Oh yeah, that conversation can be had about a lot of topics including computers!!
All depends on the group of people we are discussing. Tony
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
Ya'll slow down a minute... I need more popcorn.This is the best episode of "Grumpy Old Engineers" I've seen in a while! :-) cb From: Tony Bogan via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> To: vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> Cc: Tony Bogan <thebogans@mac.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 3:30 PM Subject: Re: [vcf-midatlantic] OT: people don't understand computers anymore This is a very long rant. Feel free to nod off or delete it at any time :-) First, best reply so far to this thread: "I really wish more folks understood a bit more about physics though, too many attempt to occupy the same space at the same time. ;-)" Now.... My 10 cents (too long to be considered 2 cents!)
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century" - don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
[snip] Herb, It sounds like you're referring to the consumer market and I don't think this is unique to the 21st century I think this really began with the advent of the appliance home computers in 1977 When the consumer market was introduced to the 3 amigo's from those competing companies, Apple, Radio Shack and Commodore Those 3 computers enabled the consumer market, and didn't require you to know the internals of the software or hardware. All else before that was strictly made for the hobbyist market, those which required some knowledge, even some made later did too of course. Not everyone needed to how to change the engine oil or rebuild an engine, much less so how to add memory or install a printer, etc, back then. So sprang the consumer computer market into action from that point on, allowing ordinary people to use these new productivity tools. Just as with TV's, stereos, and any other appliance which you didn't build from Heathkit :) Dan
On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:45 PM, Dan Roganti via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century" - don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
[snip] Herb, It sounds like you're referring to the consumer market and I don't think this is unique to the 21st century I think this really began with the advent of the appliance home computers in 1977 When the consumer market was introduced to the 3 amigo's from those competing companies, Apple, Radio Shack and Commodore Those 3 computers enabled the consumer market, and didn't require you to know the internals of the software or hardware. All else before that was strictly made for the hobbyist market, those which required some knowledge, even some made later did too of course. Not everyone needed to how to change the engine oil or rebuild an engine, much less so how to add memory or install a printer, etc, back then. So sprang the consumer computer market into action from that point on, allowing ordinary people to use these new productivity tools. Just as with TV's, stereos, and any other appliance which you didn't build from Heathkit :) Dan Dan, I respectfully disagree. I am typing a response of my experience after that time period that may elaborate. Chris
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:55 PM, chrisjpf33--- via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:45 PM, Dan Roganti via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century"
[snip]
Herb, It sounds like you're referring to the consumer market and I don't think this is unique to the 21st century I think this really began with the advent of the appliance home computers in 1977 When the consumer market was introduced to the 3 amigo's from those competing companies, Apple, Radio Shack and Commodore Those 3 computers enabled the consumer market, and didn't require you to know the internals of the software or hardware. All else before that was strictly made for the hobbyist market, those which required some knowledge, even some made later did too of course. Not everyone needed to how to change the engine oil or rebuild an engine, much less so how to add memory or install a printer, etc, back then. So sprang the consumer computer market into action from that point on, allowing ordinary people to use these new productivity tools. Just as with TV's, stereos, and any other appliance which you didn't build from Heathkit :) Dan
Dan, I respectfully disagree. I am typing a response of my experience after that time period that may elaborate.
Chris
ok, but I'm curious about which aspect you disagree People are not experts in everything And computers were appliances that early Dan
On Jun 7, 2016, at 2:01 PM, Dan Roganti via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:55 PM, chrisjpf33--- via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On Jun 7, 2016, at 1:45 PM, Dan Roganti via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century"
[snip]
Herb, It sounds like you're referring to the consumer market and I don't think this is unique to the 21st century I think this really began with the advent of the appliance home computers in 1977 When the consumer market was introduced to the 3 amigo's from those competing companies, Apple, Radio Shack and Commodore Those 3 computers enabled the consumer market, and didn't require you to know the internals of the software or hardware. All else before that was strictly made for the hobbyist market, those which required some knowledge, even some made later did too of course. Not everyone needed to how to change the engine oil or rebuild an engine, much less so how to add memory or install a printer, etc, back then. So sprang the consumer computer market into action from that point on, allowing ordinary people to use these new productivity tools. Just as with TV's, stereos, and any other appliance which you didn't build from Heathkit :) Dan
Dan, I respectfully disagree. I am typing a response of my experience after that time period that may elaborate.
Chris ok, but I'm curious about which aspect you disagree People are not experts in everything And computers were appliances that early Dan
----- I guess I only really disagree about the timing. I don't think that particular era in computing drew the line that you suggest. I think that before and after that time, people took an interest in the inner workings of their computer. At the very least, people had to understand cable connections, commands, file systems, modem baud rate, etc. I agree that people didn't have to be experts like in the mainframe days, but they certainly needed more skills than today. If I were to guess, I think that the mindless consuming of computers didn't really start happening until the Internet.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:15 PM, chrisjpf33--- via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
I guess I only really disagree about the timing. I don't think that particular era in computing drew the line that you suggest.
by all means no, I didn't want to make it sound like that. The consumer appliance market did not replace the other markets. It just what any other call a fork in the market. Those products enabled this. And this fork created a large amount of revenue for those 3 companies because they built an effective customer service to help those ordinary people who were not experienced in computers. Just as all other people needing an auto shop to get their cars fixed.
I think that before and after that time, people took an interest in the inner workings of their computer. At the very least, people had to understand cable connections, commands, file systems, modem baud rate, etc. I agree that people didn't have to be experts like in the mainframe days, but they certainly needed more skills than today. If I were to guess, I think that the mindless consuming of computers didn't really start happening until the Internet.
As I mentioned, there were still the hobbyists which took advantage of these appliance computers, just as in the homebrew days. -- that didn't stop anyone. Dan
I'm a bit old school, can't quite understand how those in computers can't understand the underlying principles of the computer (hardware and software). But along those same lines we're abstracting so much of this that we don't need to understand it that well. Even worse is that 'computers' is such a generic term/subject there is no way that anyone can know everything. I view this more like a automobile. I don't need to know a lot about electronics, computers or chemistry to drive a car. I really wish more folks understood a bit more about physics though, too many attempt to occupy the same space at the same time. ;-) Of course the Maker school of Engineering is the other extreme. The thinking that you really don't need to know that much to hook up an Arduino to control a luxury liner. Hmm, why are we paying those expensive engineers when an artist can build the same thing? Yes, that was sarcasm. Or to sum it up, nope I don't know how to solve the problem. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
Neil Cherry wrote:
I'm a bit old school, can't quite understand how those in computers can't understand the underlying principles of the computer (hardware and software). But along those same lines we're abstracting so much of this that we don't need to understand it that well.
It's a bit astonishing to me too. We get job candidates with CS degrees from reputable universities who don't know what a register is, can't explain how basic sorts work or why you would even want to know. In my opinion, the most evil phrase to come out of a software engineer's mouth is "I don't want to have to think about...". Yup, it's all abstracted away. You get a "container class" with "iterators" and "find" methods and you're all set. Not fast enough? Throw more hardware at it. This is raising my blood pressure... gotta stop. Bill S.
I don't see a problem. As others have stated, computers have inevitably become appliances just like any other sufficiently advanced and evolved technology. That's a good thing. For those motivated to do more with technology, I'd argue now is as good as or better a time than any to get your hands dirty as it were. Today's Maker movement (and the possibilities therein) is extraordinary and it's not just limited to a few of the most engineering-minded individuals like it was in past decades. Again, that's a good thing. ======================================================== Bill Loguidice, Managing Director; Armchair Arcade, Inc. <http://www.armchairarcade.com> ======================================================== Authored Books <http://www.amazon.com/Bill-Loguidice/e/B001U7W3YS/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_1> and Film <http://www.armchairarcade.com/film>; About me and other ways to get in touch <http://about.me/billloguidice> ========================================================
Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers".
There are a few smart people that end up pioneers in industries and such. Many are probably just lucky at being at the right place at the right time. We remember them because of their contributions, we forget the others. When we think back to old times we're selective and picking all the pioneers and such. People have varying degrees of interest in subjects. Some really dig into computers, some dig into cars, there are many other fields. There is a lot more going on now than the past. These old systems are pretty low hanging fruit compared to today I'd wager. I see friends working on FPGA projects, writing HPC compilers, and doing all sorts of other crazy stuff. On the retro side look at the innovations coming out for the hobby be it console games, computers, arcades. Some of it isn't ground breaking but it's still low level stuff that shows deep understanding of systems. Look at the 64K demo scene contests that currently happen around the world on the PC. To me that's modern, and so amazing. Blows my mind. Look at the videos on youtube, 64k demo 2015 or 2014 or 2013
Ethan, I agree; there are those who take a deeper interest. And just to be clear: I don't decry the lack of general computing knowledge. Rather, I do think it is a problem that many STEM programs are content to teach technology using pre-defined building blocks, rather than starting with the atomic structures with which those blocks are built. I'm not saying the everyone in tech needs to be experts, but some solid knowledge of electronics and physics fundamentals should be stressed. Otherwise, who will create the innovations of the future? Surely not those who build with nothing but macros. On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Ethan via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a
computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers".
There are a few smart people that end up pioneers in industries and such. Many are probably just lucky at being at the right place at the right time. We remember them because of their contributions, we forget the others. When we think back to old times we're selective and picking all the pioneers and such.
People have varying degrees of interest in subjects. Some really dig into computers, some dig into cars, there are many other fields. There is a lot more going on now than the past. These old systems are pretty low hanging fruit compared to today I'd wager.
I see friends working on FPGA projects, writing HPC compilers, and doing all sorts of other crazy stuff. On the retro side look at the innovations coming out for the hobby be it console games, computers, arcades. Some of it isn't ground breaking but it's still low level stuff that shows deep understanding of systems.
Look at the 64K demo scene contests that currently happen around the world on the PC. To me that's modern, and so amazing. Blows my mind. Look at the videos on youtube, 64k demo 2015 or 2014 or 2013
Ethan, I agree; there are those who take a deeper interest. And just to be clear: I don't decry the lack of general computing knowledge. Rather, I do think it is a problem that many STEM programs are content to teach technology using pre-defined building blocks, rather than starting with the atomic structures with which those blocks are built. I'm not saying the everyone in tech needs to be experts, but some solid knowledge of electronics and physics fundamentals should be stressed. Otherwise, who will create the innovations of the future? Surely not those who build with nothing but macros.
Schools still have electronics classes right? And the tools are more reachable than ever. Look at the modern oscopes (Just sold my 90 pound HP digital scope and am going to buy a Rigol!) So many open source projects for logic analyzers and SDRs (RF spectrum analyzers) and ... there is sooo much stuff and much of it is done low-level. If you take an average school kid and try to teach them assembly code they're probably not going to like it. Also, not going to retain it. But if someone wants to learn it, there are more resources than ever? You know... there is a video game where you have to solve problems with a broken system using assembly (maybe it's not accurate): http://www.zachtronics.com/tis-100/
On 6/7/2016 2:19 PM, Ethan wrote:
Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers".
There are a few smart people that end up pioneers in industries and such. Many are probably just lucky at being at the right place at the right time. We remember them because of their contributions, we forget the others. When we think back to old times we're selective and picking all the pioneers and such.
People have varying degrees of interest in subjects. Some really dig into computers, some dig into cars, there are many other fields. There is a lot more going on now than the past. These old systems are pretty low hanging fruit compared to today I'd wager.
I see friends working on FPGA projects, writing HPC compilers, and doing all sorts of other crazy stuff. On the retro side look at the innovations coming out for the hobby be it console games, computers, arcades. Some of it isn't ground breaking but it's still low level stuff that shows deep understanding of systems.
Look at the 64K demo scene contests that currently happen around the world on the PC. To me that's modern, and so amazing. Blows my mind. Look at the videos on youtube, 64k demo 2015 or 2014 or 2013
Interesting views. And I checked out a YouTube video. I'm from the 1970's era, so I don't think only about "lucky pioneers", I think about my colleagues from the era - a few of them are famous, many are not - just as you do today, Ethan, about your colleagues. In my particular case, I'm representing my era as a former professional; others of my age, were as I was also, hobbyists, early computer builders and owners. Part of my solution, is to put some of those lesser-known individuals' work - past or present - on my Web site. So that's one approach. "There's a lot more going on now, than in the past.". Hmmm...No, there's always something going on: other people are just more accessible in the 21st century. My 1990's S-100 work was distributed in a paper magazine, read by thousands, referenced in Usenet emails. We know what today's world is like, everybody accesses everybody NOW. So, how many people are "everybody"? And innovation is not a 21st century invention, Ethan. Cramming ROM monitors into 1K 8-bit codes, was a kind of contest, but Roger Amidon and Claude Kagan were trading Z80 subroutines not just for fun, but because few OWNED more than 1K of memory! So, Ethan says bringing 21st C. innovations into 20th C computers - hardware or software, contests - is another way to represent "deep understandings of systems". Fair enough, it's not entirely my way but it's a solution too, and certainly happening. Herb -- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preservation of 1970's computing email: hjohnson AAT retrotechnology DOTT com alternate: herbjohnson ATT retrotechnology DOTT info
"There's a lot more going on now, than in the past.". Hmmm...No, there's always something going on: other people are just more accessible in the 21st century. My 1990's S-100 work was distributed in a paper magazine, read by thousands, referenced in Usenet emails. We know what today's world is like, everybody accesses everybody NOW. So, how many people are "everybody"?
The speed of which things are happening I believe is increasing? Yes, the internet plays a huge part. It's amazing if you think about it. Sometimes annoying, sometimes scary. (And yes, I agree a lot of software sucks and things are overcomplicated, and software vendors add features for the sake of feeling the need to find something to improve to make new versions and stay employed, etc.) Think about the attitude from the flip side. The kids have strange bleak futures with little privacy, financial engineering from governments that doesn't benefit them but is meant to enslave them and high debt loads for the bad educations with bad job prospects and a lot of bad employers.
And innovation is not a 21st century invention, Ethan. Cramming ROM monitors into 1K 8-bit codes, was a kind of contest, but Roger Amidon and Claude Kagan were trading Z80 subroutines not just for fun, but because few OWNED more than 1K of memory!
Oh I get it, and I'm amazed. But I'm still more amazed at the demo scene and these demos that build 3d worlds with techno soundtracks and the entire binary and graphics fits in 64K of disk space for the complete executable.
So, Ethan says bringing 21st C. innovations into 20th C computers - hardware or software, contests - is another way to represent "deep understandings of systems". Fair enough, it's not entirely my way but it's a solution too, and certainly happening.
Yep. Friends that came with me to VCF East this year wanted to go to a game store in NJ on Sunday so we went. There was a collection of new games for sale for things like the Atari and Colecovision systems. Homebrew games. There are people building emulators, the MAME project that emulates arcade games is amazing. So many hardware platforms -- many encrusted in tons of tricks to thwart duplication of boards or changing board roms from one game to another. All reverse engineered at low levels. A lot of those systems are full of custom ASICs and there is zero information available to the MAME developers or public on them. And this is .. entertainment .. to some people. They're not doing it for money. If you use reddit at all and watch the medical / bio-research stuff it seems to have equally accelerated as well -- thanks to computers and information technology, bioinformatics, etc. Also, once I moved to the DC area I meet a lot of younger people who's job it is to reverse malware and such. They use debuggers and disassemblers on Windows like IDA Pro to pull apart the bad stuff and try to figure out what it does, if it's targeted or not. It's a whole field and it's pretty low level ( assembly / windows DLL calls ) and all that. No idea where their skillset came from but given their age and upcoming it probably wasn't cracking Atari / Commodore games.
here's a bunch of responses, with some kind of order to them as the discussion progressed..... To Neil and Bill Sudbrink, other "engineers" : engineering issues about becoming more "abstracted" away from computing fundamentals, is certainly a consequence of evolving technology, throughout engineering. But I'm not talking about showing engineers how things used to be done - although that's something I do - the question is about more ordinary people who see our stuff, interact with us. We have to explain our legacy mostly to ordinary people, make it relevant or interesting to them. That said, Dave McGuire makes a case, as do others, that some computing engineering is still "fundamental" where resource is (still) scarce. But the problem I see with representing vintage computers, is generally NOT one of explaining them, or making them interesting, to techies and engineers. We can generally do that, it's not a big lift, unless they are completely cold to history and metal. That's not the big problem for us. To Bill Degnan:
Sorry to be simplistic, but most people only do things when it's in their economic interest. We live today among an absolute glut of supply and disposable computers. There is no incentive to repair when replace is faster and cheaper...Interest will return as soon as it becomes economic to fix things again.
Bill and others make the point, most people today have less technologic understanding than many people did in the past - and less than most of us vintage computer owners. But not all VC owners know the technology well - as we demonstrate every VCFed fix-it weekend. Otherwise Bill says we have an uphill battle with interest, with capacity to enjoy learning, and assumptions that repair is irrelevant. These are all consequences of the 21st century to consider. There's still a subset of the curious and informed and technically inclined - that's one audience - and the for-fun gaming/audio/visual, that's another audience. The scarcity/abundance arguments of Degan and McGuire et al are ones I often make myself, in justifying why I preserve methods from days of "scarcity", as an *engineering* proposition - in case you need those skills again despite 21st century "abundance". Dave Wade says "there's a similar problem with car technology". Agreed, a lot of modern technologies are driven by locked-up hardware and software. What do we, as vintage computerists offer? - we show technology *before*, unlocked and accessible and replaceable. We are relevant as counter-example. Bill Loguidice says the "maker movement" provides accessible, buildable technology today, here-and-now. Ordinary computing is what he calls "appliances, evolved technology...a good thing". Agreed, but the price of convenience is complacency and indifference. And I find much "maker" stuff simplistic and Lego-ized (another discussion another day). We certainly don't have Lego-class vintage computers to worry about - the subject is vintage computing, not Arduino. Again - How can we as vintage computerists challenge this 21st century situation? - Again, among mere mortals? Not "engineers" which is another and somewhat different problem. Derrik Walker compares and contrasts EE's versus his mother & spouse to portray that difference. Ethan discussed another point of entry for VC-ists: modern hobby computing projects which challenge limits, some literal (FPGA's), some arbitrary (64K graphics programs on Windows/Linux PC's). He mentions in passing "a few smart people became pioneers....lucky at being at the right place and right time". I posted my disagreement - there's many unknown people we as vintage computerists can still portray today - some of us are still at work! But he shows we old-ones have common cause with today's constrained hackers - that's another solution to "how can we be relevant today?" Ethan says "today" has not entirely forgotten the past. Tony Bogan makes the point, there's several groups in discussion - please choose which group! I posted "a white flag" about this. Tony classifies these groups. The engineers, which is not what I asked about; ordinary consumers, which use technology like computers and cars as appliances, as best they can for fun or modest purpose. Then there's "power users" like Tony" those who have real work to do, real things to fix, and some real clues about how to do that - but know their limits and turn to experts when necessary. I work well with such people, in my vintage computing support activities. I think we as vintage computer people, can "reach" people like Tony, who use technology with purpose and consequence. They recognize there's "something under the hood" that they need to know something about. If we can show that vintage computers have a "hood" and they can do something with them - they may be interested. If people have no interest, if a computer is an appliance, our exhibits amount to a line of clothes washers at a laundromat. I get that attitude about S-100 systems, as in "ugly boxes full of boards" - back in the 1990's when I first heard that comment. The analogy between automobiles and computers - as consumer objects, engineering items, collectables - are numerous, and have been mentioned in this thread. Vintage car folks might be a group we can learn from, we share common experience with supporting old technology and showing it off. Their cars are prettier, and can still be driven with purpose; ours, not so much. So, Johathan (System Glitch) responds with "workshops for mortals!". With XT-class technology. Its' interesting that 1990 computing is now "vintage" (I started earlier of course). It's certainly accessible today (barely, a lot of XT's got scrapped), and 21st century tools make it a "mortal" pursuit, to make PC boards and populate them, write software, etc.. I'd argue that building 1980's boards in 2015 isn't "vintage enough" for me, but people like to make kits - can't deny that. It's another answer! Chris Fala, says "Not sure if what I am about to say is helpful or if it is what you are looking for, Herb, but allow me to relate a short story of personal experience." It wasn't quite short, but Chris makes an important point - we can describe our histories, be our own examples, of our relationships in-the-day to vintage computing. We can be our own "pioneers...experts...in the right place at the right time". The 21st century is a period of "narrative". So Chris's narrative has impact and value, thank you. I would not mind putting it on my Web site, Chris. Dean Notarnicola makes a point of similar class: how to represent the past, as history, by relating the unfamiliar to the familiar; by context; and by other means of conveying "history". Dean acknowledges Chris's history as a means to that end, and validates that type of answer. Ethan offers the dark side of the 21st century: cue the "Hunger Games" music....
Think about the attitude from the flip side. The kids have strange bleak futures with little privacy, financial engineering from governments that doesn't benefit them but is meant to enslave them and high debt loads for the bad educations with bad job prospects and a lot of bad employers.
Well, that's certainly a view that many hold today. Evil government, evil business, high debt, limited future. Watch out for what "everyone knows", and see who benefits from propagating such "attitudes". Not too much political discussion please.... ...but certainly part of the historic narrative of vintage computing is about resources, opportunities, and a positive view about the future. Ethan contrasts that with today's view. Putting technology aside, the counter-perspective I suggest may draw some interest from non-technologists today. Not all of vintage personal computing was about "technology". People from Berkley (California) and MIT, saw it as a liberation movement, to empower people with ownership of and access to information. Hey baby, who owns your Microsoft Word now? Where does your boss keep the data files - on your desk, or in the server, or in "the cloud"? These are issues of consequence today - and vintage computerists can address those issues.
Yep. Friends that came with me to VCF East this year wanted to go to a game store in NJ on Sunday so we went. There was a collection of new games for sale for things like the Atari and Colecovision systems. Homebrew games. There are people building emulators, the MAME project that emulates arcade games is amazing.
Freedom....freeDOM.....! (raises fist in air) Although, it is "video games". My poor S-100 systems....Cromemco Dazzler....."Kill the bit"....sigh....But again, we find our common ground where we can. ---------------- Friends, I gotta get off my chair and do stuff, not pound keys. I'm glad my post evoked a range of thoughts, considerations, reactions - and stuck home in ways with many people, familar to me and not. I'm sure there will be more posts. The subject isn't Herb Johnson, I just raised and tried to focus the issue. But I hope I've responded briefly to most of those who thoughtfully replied and discussed the issues. I'll see if I can consider and respond to additional posts in due course; and come up with something more thoughtful as I process these responses. Thanks, thanks to all. Herb Johnson -- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preservation of 1970's computing email: hjohnson AAT retrotechnology DOTT com alternate: herbjohnson ATT retrotechnology DOTT info
Herb Johnson wrote:
To Neil and Bill Sudbrink, other "engineers" : engineering issues about becoming more "abstracted" away from computing fundamentals, is certainly a consequence of evolving technology, throughout engineering. But I'm not talking about showing engineers how things used to be done - although that's something I do - the question is about more ordinary people who see our stuff, interact with us. We have to explain our legacy mostly to ordinary people, make it relevant or interesting to them.
Ok. I'll "blow my own horn" then. I think I was able to engage a number of more "ordinary" people with the Cyclops I exhibited at the just passed VCF East. Especially when I pointed out to them that the cell phone camera that they were using to take a picture had a direct lineage to the thing they were taking a picture of. Likewise, that the Dazzler computer display again, was an ancestor of the color display on their smart phone. Bill S.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century" - don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
It's a subject relevant to vintage computing, because that affects what we are obliged to tell people, to explain, when showing our vintage systems. It's also relevant, because one reason to preserve and operate these vintage systems, is to SHOW how these things worked, to preserve by example their fundamental nature and approach to computing (personal or otherwise). It's a preservation of a level of direct knowledge, which was necessary "then", but not necessary "now".
Evidence for "now": recently, someone contacted me as part of my vintage-Mac services, with a vague request. Something close to "I'm trying to read and edit a file from a 1994 Mac, in an obsolete file format from vintage publishing software. Can you help me open and reformat that file?"
It took three or so emails, to get the particulars, which are easy to describe either as hardware or software (IDE hard drive, 6300 model Mac, Aldus Pagemaker 6). At some point, some "technical service" told this person they could "read the file from the hard drive" - yet this person couldn't say if they HAD the file on "their PC". Or even clearly say they had a Windows PC or a Mac PC.
I had to keep asking questions to get these basics. Why? Because they are no longer active questions. "Everyone" uses Windows (a few use Macs, some use Linux, but context quickly establishes which). Those OS's do everything by magic now, little user intervention needed. Even the computer dealers (by my experience) don't know "how" they work, they just work. On hardware, "if it fits, it works". Many people don't know how to find a file through a file directory (desktop folders); the programs "know" where they are. These people get lost, even doing backups.
I think that's pretty fundamental.
Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers".
That's my experience today. I get this a lot. Again - I'm not looking for a discussion that rags on "today's computer users are idiots". That's not the point. the point is, what do we as vintage computer demonstrators do, when confronted with such people, who look at our systems?
Also: I appreciate I have a point of view, not shared by all vintage computer owners. Some may see their stuff, as say "neat gaming systems that we all enjoyed at a similar time in our lives" and simply want to operate them with others who share that same experience. Whether the game is downloaded from the Internet or from an original ROM cartridge is irrelevant. Or, maybe, played on an emulator. I'm aware of that point of view. If those with such interests, have parallel experience with "people today don't appreciate 1990's video games", that would be informative to me, in this discussion.
OK? These are real questions of real interest to me. How do we do, what we do with vintage computers, in this context? This is not a rag-on-morons gripe session. OK?
Herb Johnson with a point of view retrotechnology.com
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net
-------------------------------------------------------------- Let me preface this by saying that a few years ago when I first heard about the “Maker Movement”, I struggled to define just what that meant. I thought to myself, I make things and fix things. What is the big deal? It turns out that it was really that simple. The fact is that when I was a kid, my father and uncles did everything themselves. It was unheard of to hire someone to do an electrical, plumbing, roofing, automotive, etc. repair. My mom knew shorthand (lost art), could type so well I am embarrassed, could cook anything like an expert chef, knew how to garden because the family were professional farmers (or course she could drive the tractor too), could sew and crochet and knit… and on and on. We were ALL makers. Everyone did whatever it took to get the job done, and learned what was necessary to accomplish the task. On a side note (which turns out to be surprisingly pertinent), there was a high degree of conservatism. Everyone’s garage had boxes of every nut, bolt, screw, nail, spark plug, spring, hinge, etc. that they ever laid their hands on. Nothing was ever thrown away because money was short and you never knew when you might need something. People used their heads and hands and hearts to the fullest on every task. Nothing was taken for granted. (Just like early programmers didn’t waste RAM.) Not sure if what I am about to say is helpful or if it is what you are looking for, Herb, but allow me to relate a short story of personal experience. When I was a kid, I was always interested in electricity and electronics. My mom bought me several of the Radio Shack x-hundred-in-one electronics project kits and other types of technical project kits. My dad let me wire our basement around age 10 after reading a small booklet about wiring switches, outlets, and fuse boxes. I absorbed the stuff and was enthralled by it. I couldn’t get enough knowledge about science and technology (still true about me now). In my early teens, my school got a computer for the first time (TRS-80 Model I). Shortly thereafter my sister bought me my first computer (Commodore VIC-20). This afforded me my first exposure (immersion) and the opportunity to teach myself BASIC. I spend countless hours writing programs because that was the only way to get programs. Computers actually came with books back then and I read every word. To a small degree, I understood binary and how a computer operated on it. I also had a basic understanding of electronic circuits and transistors. However, I didn't understand how they worked together. Then I met a guy who I considered to be an electronic genius, literally. He could mentally visualize all kinds of complex circuits and could design, build, or repair anything. I was always envious of his level of skill and considered myself a beginner/novice/idiot by comparison. One day this guy was working on some electronic stuff with me and showed me a simple 7400 IC. He showed me how you give it power, set voltages on the input pins and get voltages on the output pins based on the function of the logic gate. It sounds simple and maybe silly, but this small experience was a huge revelation to me. So you mean that 0 volts is a logic 0 and 5 volts is a logic 1? That is how numbers and electronics relate to each other? Suddenly a whole new world opened up to me. A few months later I wrote by hand on paper (and hand programmed byte by byte with a homemade EPROM burner with toggle switches) a small Z-80 machine language program after teaching myself the instruction set by reading the reference book. I also built a digital frequency display for my CB radio that had custom outputs driven by EPROM data. On another project I interfaced a touch-tone decoder and a relay to my VIC-20 to control a light in my house. The hardware and software relationship finally made sense, and the opportunities were endless. Because of that experience (and also just because I am very analytical) I would never be able to take any electronic (or mechanical) device for granted. I had gained an understanding at such a basic level which allowed me to see past the superficial, that no matter how complex something was I could understand or at least appreciated what the engineers must have gone through to make it work. Today, technology is wrapped up in a neat package, handed to you, and does everything automatically. Today the software and hardware are inaccessible and invisible and all one sees are the bells and whistles. A partial answer to your question is that people need to learn what is inside that makes things work, what came generations before which allowed people to learn to develop the way to make things work, and that there is more to a device than what you see on the surface so learn to appreciate the intricacies of how something functions. Above I have shared part of how I learned to appreciate these things. I am not sure how to convey that knowledge to others. Perhaps find a way to pull back the curtain and expose a facet that might pique someone’s interest beyond their usual experience. I was personally interested in learning, but I fear that most people aren't. Attention spans are much shorter, the noise level is almost insurmountable. I heard a sales saying from an old boss that goes, “people don’t buy drills, they buy holes”. Sell the people what they want somehow. Offer a reason why it matters to them so that you can then deliver the message. It is very difficult to say why one person is receptive to something and another is not. I hope this was useful and/or interesting. Chris Fala
Chris, your example says it all perfectly. Mine was a very similar experience. And I fear your conclusions are correct. You can't make people learn, you can only present the information in a clear, relatable way and hope it strikes the same chord in them that it struck in many of us. if not, at the very least you exposed someone to fresh knowledge. On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Chris Fala via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
As it's quiet on the maillist, I'll ask about something on the edges of vintage computing. People today - I use the phrase "in the 21st century"
don't seem to know anything about how computers work, anymore. I'd like a little feedback, not a huge discussion (and not a gripe session), about how common that ignorance is, what we as vintage computer owners should do - once I clarify what I mean, and provide an example.
It's a subject relevant to vintage computing, because that affects what we are obliged to tell people, to explain, when showing our vintage systems. It's also relevant, because one reason to preserve and operate these vintage systems, is to SHOW how these things worked, to preserve by example their fundamental nature and approach to computing (personal or otherwise). It's a preservation of a level of direct knowledge, which was necessary "then", but not necessary "now".
Evidence for "now": recently, someone contacted me as part of my vintage-Mac services, with a vague request. Something close to "I'm trying to read and edit a file from a 1994 Mac, in an obsolete file format from vintage publishing software. Can you help me open and reformat that file?"
It took three or so emails, to get the particulars, which are easy to describe either as hardware or software (IDE hard drive, 6300 model Mac, Aldus Pagemaker 6). At some point, some "technical service" told this person they could "read the file from the hard drive" - yet this person couldn't say if they HAD the file on "their PC". Or even clearly say they had a Windows PC or a Mac PC.
I had to keep asking questions to get these basics. Why? Because they are no longer active questions. "Everyone" uses Windows (a few use Macs, some use Linux, but context quickly establishes which). Those OS's do everything by magic now, little user intervention needed. Even the computer dealers (by my experience) don't know "how" they work, they just work. On hardware, "if it fits, it works". Many people don't know how to find a file through a file directory (desktop folders); the programs "know" where they are. These people get lost, even doing backups.
I think that's pretty fundamental.
Oh - Ted Nelson, at a VCF-E dinner, said to me he tried to teach a computer course at a community college. He said "I gave up in three weeks, because the students didn't know (bleep) about computers".
That's my experience today. I get this a lot. Again - I'm not looking for a discussion that rags on "today's computer users are idiots". That's not the point. the point is, what do we as vintage computer demonstrators do, when confronted with such people, who look at our systems?
Also: I appreciate I have a point of view, not shared by all vintage computer owners. Some may see their stuff, as say "neat gaming systems that we all enjoyed at a similar time in our lives" and simply want to operate them with others who share that same experience. Whether the game is downloaded from the Internet or from an original ROM cartridge is irrelevant. Or, maybe, played on an emulator. I'm aware of that point of view. If those with such interests, have parallel experience with "people today don't appreciate 1990's video games", that would be informative to me, in this discussion.
OK? These are real questions of real interest to me. How do we do, what we do with vintage computers, in this context? This is not a rag-on-morons gripe session. OK?
Herb Johnson with a point of view retrotechnology.com
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net
--------------------------------------------------------------
Let me preface this by saying that a few years ago when I first heard about the “Maker Movement”, I struggled to define just what that meant. I thought to myself, I make things and fix things. What is the big deal? It turns out that it was really that simple. The fact is that when I was a kid, my father and uncles did everything themselves. It was unheard of to hire someone to do an electrical, plumbing, roofing, automotive, etc. repair. My mom knew shorthand (lost art), could type so well I am embarrassed, could cook anything like an expert chef, knew how to garden because the family were professional farmers (or course she could drive the tractor too), could sew and crochet and knit… and on and on. We were ALL makers. Everyone did whatever it took to get the job done, and learned what was necessary to accomplish the task. On a side note (which turns out to be surprisingly pertinent), there was a high degree of conservatism. Everyone’s garage had boxes of every nut, bolt, screw, nail, spark plug, spring, hinge, etc. that they ever laid their hands on. Nothing was ever thrown away because money was short and you never knew when you might need something. People used their heads and hands and hearts to the fullest on every task. Nothing was taken for granted. (Just like early programmers didn’t waste RAM.)
Not sure if what I am about to say is helpful or if it is what you are looking for, Herb, but allow me to relate a short story of personal experience. When I was a kid, I was always interested in electricity and electronics. My mom bought me several of the Radio Shack x-hundred-in-one electronics project kits and other types of technical project kits. My dad let me wire our basement around age 10 after reading a small booklet about wiring switches, outlets, and fuse boxes. I absorbed the stuff and was enthralled by it. I couldn’t get enough knowledge about science and technology (still true about me now).
In my early teens, my school got a computer for the first time (TRS-80 Model I). Shortly thereafter my sister bought me my first computer (Commodore VIC-20). This afforded me my first exposure (immersion) and the opportunity to teach myself BASIC. I spend countless hours writing programs because that was the only way to get programs. Computers actually came with books back then and I read every word.
To a small degree, I understood binary and how a computer operated on it. I also had a basic understanding of electronic circuits and transistors. However, I didn't understand how they worked together.
Then I met a guy who I considered to be an electronic genius, literally. He could mentally visualize all kinds of complex circuits and could design, build, or repair anything. I was always envious of his level of skill and considered myself a beginner/novice/idiot by comparison.
One day this guy was working on some electronic stuff with me and showed me a simple 7400 IC. He showed me how you give it power, set voltages on the input pins and get voltages on the output pins based on the function of the logic gate. It sounds simple and maybe silly, but this small experience was a huge revelation to me. So you mean that 0 volts is a logic 0 and 5 volts is a logic 1? That is how numbers and electronics relate to each other? Suddenly a whole new world opened up to me.
A few months later I wrote by hand on paper (and hand programmed byte by byte with a homemade EPROM burner with toggle switches) a small Z-80 machine language program after teaching myself the instruction set by reading the reference book. I also built a digital frequency display for my CB radio that had custom outputs driven by EPROM data. On another project I interfaced a touch-tone decoder and a relay to my VIC-20 to control a light in my house. The hardware and software relationship finally made sense, and the opportunities were endless.
Because of that experience (and also just because I am very analytical) I would never be able to take any electronic (or mechanical) device for granted. I had gained an understanding at such a basic level which allowed me to see past the superficial, that no matter how complex something was I could understand or at least appreciated what the engineers must have gone through to make it work.
Today, technology is wrapped up in a neat package, handed to you, and does everything automatically. Today the software and hardware are inaccessible and invisible and all one sees are the bells and whistles. A partial answer to your question is that people need to learn what is inside that makes things work, what came generations before which allowed people to learn to develop the way to make things work, and that there is more to a device than what you see on the surface so learn to appreciate the intricacies of how something functions. Above I have shared part of how I learned to appreciate these things. I am not sure how to convey that knowledge to others. Perhaps find a way to pull back the curtain and expose a facet that might pique someone’s interest beyond their usual experience. I was personally interested in learning, but I fear that most people aren't. Attention spans are much shorter, the noise level is almost insurmountable. I heard a sales saying from an old boss that goes, “people don’t buy drills, they buy holes”. Sell the people what they want somehow. Offer a reason why it matters to them so that you can then deliver the message. It is very difficult to say why one person is receptive to something and another is not.
I hope this was useful and/or interesting.
Chris Fala
participants (14)
-
Ben Greenfield -
Bill Loguidice -
Bill Sudbrink -
Chris Fala -
chrisjpf33＠gmail.com
-
Christian Liendo -
Christopher Blackmon -
Dan Roganti -
Dave McGuire -
Dean Notarnicola -
Ethan -
Herb Johnson -
Neil Cherry -
Tony Bogan