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

[Exegete <millers@noneofyourbusiness.com>]

Tjoff Tjonk wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:44:59 -0400, jeff findley wrote:
>
>
> > "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.
>
>
> Most of us agree with that this was a very impressive feat, but it did
> cost enormous amounts of money....

Almost anything being done for the first time costs huge amounts of 
money. In this case, when designing, testing, constructing and using the 
most powerful machine in the history of the human race, as well as the 
tools to make and test said machine, well, if it could have been done 
for less don't you think they would have?




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----