[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Apple II: Second Best Tech Product of All Time!
- Subject: Re: Apple II: Second Best Tech Product of All Time!
- From: "mdj" <mdj.mdj@gmail.com>
- Date: 4 Apr 2007 00:08:03 -0700
- Complaints-to: groups-abuse@google.com
- In-reply-to: <euu8q8$1sn6$1@merope.saaf.se>
- Injection-info: n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=131.244.3.45; posting-account=W_jMEA0AAAAZdNaersJnc-7Hjv-SIC8Q
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- Organization: http://groups.google.com
- References: <1175623371.633432.167810@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <euu8q8$1sn6$1@merope.saaf.se>
- User-agent: G2/1.0
- Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.sys.apple2:24737
On Apr 4, 5:12 am, pau...@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter) wrote:
> Think of it! If one would make a list of "the 50 best tech products
> of all time", and if one was serious both about "tech products" and
> "of all time", wouldn't it be an unforgiveable error to omit things
> like:
>
> - the telegraph and the telephone
> - the train and the automobile
> - the aeroplane
> - the refrigerator
> - mining (without that, no metals, and no computers!)
> - the boat (quite old, true, but didn't we say "of all time"?)
> - agriculture (also very old, but didn't we say "of all time"?)
> - taming fire (even older, but didn't we say "of all time"?)
> - and, of course: the wheel !!!!
>
> Without these things, there would have been no Netscape, no Apple II,
> and none of the other 50 products in PC World's list.
>
> Is modern man losing perspective of his own history?
Paul, I'm with you here :-) Although if we are going to talk about
technological advancement, I'd nominate contraceptive technology as
one of the most profound advancements, given its massive impact both
culturally and economically.
If we're going to pick computer/electronic technology then surely the
integrated circuit itself stands above everything else in terms of
it's impact, but I'll give an acknowledging nod to anyone who says
"But surely the thermionic valve, before which we had no way to
control the direction of current in circuits rates higher".
:-)
Matt