Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming (was My First Computer)

["Randy McLaughlin" <randy@nospam.com>]

"jeff findley" <jeff.findley@no.sdrc.spam.com> wrote in message
yz93ci7i8kk.fsf@sgipd572.net.plm.eds.com">news:yz93ci7i8kk.fsf@sgipd572.net.plm.eds.com...
> "Randy McLaughlin" <randy@nospam.com> writes:
> > The truth is powerful computers are much cheaper than paying for quality
> > programming.  If you are Micro$loth you get others to pay for your bad
> > programming and they have to buy the new computers to run the new poor
> > quality software to run it on since the older computers don't have the
> > "horse-power".  Of course we sent men to the moon using computers with
less
> > "horse-power" than the IBM-PC (8088).  I admit that the astronauts did
not
> > need to use MS Word though.
>
> Even more impressive is the hardware that sent them to the moon and
> back was mostly designed by guys with sliderules rather than the
> scientific calculators that computers have largely replaced today.
>
> Jeff
> -- 
> Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
> If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.

It's unfair for they didn't have an opportunity to play spider solitaire.

In the 70's there was a study on the effect of computers on business
letters.  Originally businesses were able to triple the productivity of
secretarial work by being able to pull up a letter and edit it to send to
someone else.  Today the productivity has dropped to below the computer era:
People are now more interested in having the correct font than in getting a
letter out.  That is where the computing power has gone.

In the 70's I sold CP/M systems running electric pencil to offices
(especially lawyers).  I was competing wit $15,000.00 word-processors.  I
did a great service to these offices.  Now days when I set up a machine I
know I am no longer giving the same service.  I haven't changed the
environment has changed.