Talk:Computer

"The Atanasoff–Berry Computer (ABC) was the world's first electronic digital computer, albeit not programmable."[2

Following my sources, the A-B computer was first successfully used in summer 1941, while the Zuse Z3 was already successfully used in May 1941. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.115.250.216 (talk • contribs) 12:45, 2 November 2012‎

Edit request on 11 April 2013

HARDWARE: SOME IMPORTANT COMPONANT OF HARDWARE WHICH ARE UNDER BELOW 1.INPUT 2.MOMERY 3.PROCESSOR ETC - 118.107.133.149 (118.107.133.149) 07:47, 11 April 2013‎

Like the ones in the Components section? - X201 (talk) 08:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

A lot of information from the women in computing article deserves to be in this article as well.

I put up the tag that mentions how there is information missing when it comes to women in computing in this article. Lovelace isn't mentioned and the use of computer to refer to women isn't mentioned at all in this article (human computer talks about humans as computers and even has a pictures of woman being computers). My changes to this article are to include the usage of computer being used to refer to humans, especially female humans.--JasonMacker (talk) 00:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I added a paragraph in the history of computing section on Lovelace and added a picture of her as well. The information was pulled from the lead of Ada Lovelace, as well as Lovelace's mention in Women in computing#Timeline_of_women_in_computing.--JasonMacker (talk) 00:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

• Speaking about Ada Lovelace, it occurs to me that there is also information missing about drug addicts in computing, and other groups, such as homosexuals. Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 17:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I replaced the artificially darkened picture of the ENIAC with a much clearer one of the main control panel.--JasonMacker (talk) 01:05, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Hoaxes

Around the end of the 10th century, the French monk Gerbert d'Aurillac brought back from Spain the drawings of a machine invented by the Moors that answered either Yes or No to the questions it was asked. Again in the 13th century, the monks Albertus Magnus and Roger Bacon built talking androids without any further development (Albertus Magnus complained that he had wasted forty years of his life when Thomas Aquinas, terrified by his machine, destroyed it).

This was in the "history of computing" section. First, I think the Moorish machine (a brazen head) was either a hoax or a glorified Magic 8-Ball sort of thing — either way, there's not much computation going on. (If the "machine" spoke aloud, it was certainly a hoax.) Second, I'm a bit baffled that it didn't mention that Magnus and Bacon's machine was a hoax. Sure, it may seem too obvious to mention, but leaving it out makes it looks like the sort of random nonsense that people sometimes put in Wikipedia. Finally, this really has very little to do with computing. People of the time had very little notion of what we would call a computer, and would likely not be able to readily equate the concept of talking machines with computation. I suspect these people weren't imagining computing devices, but rather talking inanimate objects. Does the notion of a talking mirror bring computation to mind? Surely not. I'm removing this from the article. - furrykef (Talk at me) 12:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

thoughts

Hmm, I'd bet many pounds this article was heavily edited by a Brit. I guess that's obvious to anyone reading it.

Only a Brit would take a manual describing the construction of EDVAC - "First Draft of a Report on the EDVAC", run off and make a copy of it, and then try to claim they were first. The EDVAC was a working Von Neumann computing machine, and presented to the public in 1947. It just wasn't able to be delivered to the customer until 49 because of patent disputes. So claiming that British copies of it demonstrated in 1948, based on the EDVAC manual, were first, is just plain wrong in so many ways.

Looking down the article, like the integrated circuit and other areas, I'm proud to note that in most places, no American felt the need to put in that every US first was in fact American. This does seem to be a European obsession. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkelly1966 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Right. Chauvinism being unheard of among Americans. Rivertorch (talk) 18:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

pc

I in pc warld--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC) --109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)--109.204.31.237 (talk) 16:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)