This is what people don't get, IOS and Mac sharing features is good, sharing OS is bad.
Maybe that's true in the Apple ecosystem. MS did very good with Windows 10 in 2-1 devices, even though they still have to fix some things. And I'm not saying that Apple is doing wrong, it just different from MS.
none of what you've said has anything to do with the iPad being a computer.
Sure, an iPad is definitely a computer. My auto also has several onboard computers. The lines are blurred between what makes something a device or makes it a computer. I think the old school definition was that if the machine could be used to write a program that runs on the same machine then it was a true computer. Otherwise it was some sort of device or controller. That definition is bit strict these days and perhaps we should expand it to include any device that allows for on screen human interface input to be a full fledged computer since we don't use punch cards or toggle switches any longer.
But who cares. To each their own.
If an iPad gets the job done good for you. In my line of work, I need a bit more capabilities and since I'm not in a profession that needs to be mobile, a desktop works out better for me, although I do have a couple iPads, MBP, an Apple Watch and an iPhone, and I consider them all to be computers.
It may be the single greatest improvement to iOS text input since iOS 1.
Such a relief to have, and to be able to abandon the old way.
Is this text selection mode available on all iPads, or just the latest? I couldn't seem to activate it on my Air, but I could have given up too quickly.
Sure, an iPad is definitely a computer. My auto also has several onboard computers. The lines are blurred between what makes something a device or makes it a computer. I think the old school definition was that if the machine could be used to write a program that runs on the same machine then it was a true computer. Otherwise it was some sort of device or controller. That definition is bit strict these days and perhaps we should expand it to include any device that allows for on screen human interface input to be a full fledged computer since we don't use punch cards or toggle switches any longer.
But who cares. To each their own.
If an iPad gets the job done good for you. In my line of work, I need a bit more capabilities and since I'm not in a profession that needs to be mobile, a desktop works out better for me, although I do have a couple iPads, MBP, an Apple Watch and an iPhone, and I consider them all to be computers.
the original Mac team used Lisas to write the Mac and its apps. it didnt even have a hard drive or storage other than external floppy. did that make it "not a computer"? nonsense, of course.
also, the only place ive seen it argued that one must be able to compile programs in order for the device to be a computer is on forums like these. certainly dont recall that in my CS courses or history of the computer material.
the original Mac team used Lisas to write the Mac and is apps. did that make it not a computer?
That would be like saying that my Mac is not a computer because I can write applications with Windows and Linux in a cross compiling environment that will run on a Mac.
As I recall the first Mac could write applications that ran on Macs, so yes, even by the outdated definition they were computers.
That would be like saying that my Mac is not a computer because I can write applications with Windows and Linux in a cross compiling environment that will run on a Mac.
no. they had to use a Lisa, you couldnt write programs on the original mac until the MDS IDE was built:
"Around later 1984 or 1985 Apple provided the Macintosh Development System (MDS) which ran on the Macintosh 512K model I recall (I believe the Macintosh 128 couldn't run MDS but may be wrong). This allowed you to develop 68000 assembly language programs on the Macintosh. I never used it since I didn't write in assembly language (too tedious) and I had a Lisa with the Workshop and its wonderful Lisa Pascal language."
...some of the comments on that link are from hobbyist coders of the day. fun to read about their experiences and memories.
As I recall the first Mac could write applications that ran on Macs, so yes, even by the outdated definition they were computers.
that definition doesnt exist anywhere in history except on forums where people want to pretend the ipad isnt a computer.
Well that wouldn't be me. I'm arguing the opposite.
thats cool, but you were challenging my point that the original Mac was a computer, despite the fact that you couldnt not write Mac program on it. a Lisa was needed, tho later some people hacked a way to do it on an Apple ][. later Macs gained the environment to code on it.
but it would be insane for anyone to claim the original Mac was not a computer, right?
If you want, I can take back half the stuff I said if you want to limit it to just the MBA.
Here i'll start a new train of thought. In this case i'll consider OSX to constitute the class real computer and iOS to constitute the class of mobile device.
The new MB is, in a lot of ways, underwhelming. The CoreM is too soon and does under-perform. Even the slightly larger MBA is quite a lot faster.
In a "real computer" I expect to get PCI-E based flash storage or at the very least, SATA 3. Even now SATA3 is considered out-dated. And as you say, it does cost more, but that is what I expect when I buy a Mac.
No, I do not consider WIFI and Bluetooth to be I/O in the same sense I consider USB and Thunderbolt. Little nuances aside, generally things happen over the network which happens over WIFI. With USB, it is one step closer to the system.
Yes, all display equipped Macs do have LCD displays. LED is a backlight technology, not a display technology. Unless you want an OLED display, like I do.
However recent Macs gained full multitasking, I still prefer to have it over iOS which doesn't have it to the same degree.
Maybe that's true in the Apple ecosystem. MS did very good with Windows 10 in 2-1 devices, even though they still have to fix some things. And I'm not saying that Apple is doing wrong, it just different from MS.
I agree, Microsoft integrated it well, but that's (IMO) because their desktop OS is really just in need of porting to mobile, and that's what a good number of their customers love, the same feel. But if you ported Mac OS(or IOS) across, some apps would now be incompatible, and the interface would be much painful to use, it's the advanced vs simple, while windows is moderate across.
Sure, an iPad is definitely a computer. My auto also has several onboard computers. The lines are blurred between what makes something a device or makes it a computer. I think the old school definition was that if the machine could be used to write a program that runs on the same machine then it was a true computer. Otherwise it was some sort of device or controller. That definition is bit strict these days and perhaps we should expand it to include any device that allows for on screen human interface input to be a full fledged computer since we don't use punch cards or toggle switches any longer.
But who cares. To each their own.
If an iPad gets the job done good for you. In my line of work, I need a bit more capabilities and since I'm not in a profession that needs to be mobile, a desktop works out better for me, although I do have a couple iPads, MBP, an Apple Watch and an iPhone, and I consider them all to be computers.
Considering the devices that we carry with us everyday in our pockets or backpacks used to take up an entire building AND sent a man to the moon; plus how the vast majority of people actually USE those computers while doing little to no computing whatsoever to further mankind... I would suggest that me banging nonsensically on my piano just to make noise and piss off my parents in my youth should've been answered when they complained with, " Ah Mom... leave me alone... I'm just computering! "
IMHO: very little that gets done with computers today is "computing" just because there's mechanical reaction to human input. Mostly the equivalent of a monkey or a mouse pushing a button to get a piece of fruit, where the mouse often gets the bad deal and finds itself in a trap.
Well that wouldn't be me. I'm arguing the opposite.
thats cool, but you were challenging my point that the original Mac was a computer, despite the fact that you couldnt not write Mac program on it. a Lisa was needed, tho later some people hacked a way to do it on an Apple ][. later Macs gained the environment to code on it.
but it would be insane for anyone to claim the original Mac was not a computer, right?
Actually, the Apple ][ had an Assembler, Integer BASIC, Graphics routines, etc. built into the ROM of the machine -- so it was a self-contained computer that could be used to program itself.
Yes, Lisa's were used to develop software for the original Macs -- especially since there were no Macs in existence while the Mac was being developed.
After the original Macs were released, the Lisa continued to be used because it had more robust software and hardware.
However, the original Macs had a lot of Software (QuickDraw, for example) in ROM and had a ROM low-level OS/CLI that could be used to program the Mac on the Mac.
Features[edit]
The Macintosh was designed to achieve adequate graphics performance, which had previously required hardware costing over US $100,000, a price inaccessible to the middle class. This narrow goal resulted in an efficient design which traded off expandability but met or exceeded the baseline performance of its competitors.[8][9]
Processor and memory[edit]
The centerpiece of the machine was a Motorola 68000 microprocessor running at 7.8336 MHz, connected to 128 KB RAM shared by the processor and the display controller. The boot procedure and some operating system routines were contained in an additional 64 KB ROM chip. Apple did not offer RAM upgrades.
This was enabled through a simple plastic "Programmers" key that attached through a vent in the side of the Mac. When pressed, this key would push a button on the Mac motherboard (provided especially for this purpose) and the Mac would go into CLI mode.
The Programmer's Key, or interrupt button, is a button or switch on a computer which causes an asynchronous interrupt request (IRQ) to be sent to the processor. If a debugger is installed on the machine, it is activated when the interrupt request is processed, allowing the user to view and usually modify the computer's internal memory. The interrupt is of highest priority, allowing debugging of interrupt handlers. This is quite useful in debugging software, which is why it gets its name.
The "key" need not always be a button or a switch. On some computers, it is a pinhole into which a straightened paperclip - or syringe - must be inserted (to prevent accidental activation).
This term is used chiefly among Macintosh programmers, perhaps because the Mac hardware once supported this function. On most 68000 family based Macintosh computers, an interrupt request can also be sent by holding down the command key and striking the power key on the keyboard. This effect is also simulated by the 68000 environment of the Mac OS nanokernel on PowerPC machines and the Classic environment.
Modern Mac hardware no longer includes the interrupt button, as the Mac OS X operating system has integrated debugging options. In addition, Mac OS X's protected memory blocks direct patching of system memory (in order to better secure the system).
Considering the devices that we carry with us everyday in our pockets or backpacks used to take up an entire building AND sent a man to the moon; plus how the vast majority of people actually USE those computers while doing little to no computing whatsoever to further mankind... I would suggest that me banging nonsensically on my piano just to make noise and piss off my parents in my youth should've been answered when they complained with, " Ah Mom... leave me alone... I'm just computering! "
IMHO: very little that gets done with computers today is "computing" just because there's mechanical reaction to human input. Mostly the equivalent of a monkey or a mouse pushing a button to get a piece of fruit, where the mouse often gets the bad deal and finds itself in a trap.
Comments
Just wish the new iPhones had the same capability (cursor control using the keyboard like the iPad under iOS 9)...
This is what people don't get, IOS and Mac sharing features is good, sharing OS is bad.
Maybe that's true in the Apple ecosystem. MS did very good with Windows 10 in 2-1 devices, even though they still have to fix some things. And I'm not saying that Apple is doing wrong, it just different from MS.
none of what you've said has anything to do with the iPad being a computer.
Sure, an iPad is definitely a computer. My auto also has several onboard computers. The lines are blurred between what makes something a device or makes it a computer. I think the old school definition was that if the machine could be used to write a program that runs on the same machine then it was a true computer. Otherwise it was some sort of device or controller. That definition is bit strict these days and perhaps we should expand it to include any device that allows for on screen human interface input to be a full fledged computer since we don't use punch cards or toggle switches any longer.
But who cares. To each their own.
If an iPad gets the job done good for you. In my line of work, I need a bit more capabilities and since I'm not in a profession that needs to be mobile, a desktop works out better for me, although I do have a couple iPads, MBP, an Apple Watch and an iPhone, and I consider them all to be computers.
Is this text selection mode available on all iPads, or just the latest? I couldn't seem to activate it on my Air, but I could have given up too quickly.
the original Mac team used Lisas to write the Mac and its apps. it didnt even have a hard drive or storage other than external floppy. did that make it "not a computer"? nonsense, of course.
also, the only place ive seen it argued that one must be able to compile programs in order for the device to be a computer is on forums like these. certainly dont recall that in my CS courses or history of the computer material.
the original Mac team used Lisas to write the Mac and is apps. did that make it not a computer?
That would be like saying that my Mac is not a computer because I can write applications with Windows and Linux in a cross compiling environment that will run on a Mac.
As I recall the first Mac could write applications that ran on Macs, so yes, even by the outdated definition they were computers.
no. they had to use a Lisa, you couldnt write programs on the original mac until the MDS IDE was built:
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=3rd_Party_Developers_and_Macintosh_Development.txt
"Around later 1984 or 1985 Apple provided the Macintosh Development System (MDS) which ran on the Macintosh 512K model I recall (I believe the Macintosh 128 couldn't run MDS but may be wrong). This allowed you to develop 68000 assembly language programs on the Macintosh. I never used it since I didn't write in assembly language (too tedious) and I had a Lisa with the Workshop and its wonderful Lisa Pascal language."
...some of the comments on that link are from hobbyist coders of the day. fun to read about their experiences and memories.
that definition doesnt exist anywhere in history except on forums where people want to pretend the ipad isnt a computer.
that definition doesnt exist anywhere in history except on forums where people want to pretend the ipad isnt a computer.
Well that wouldn't be me. I'm arguing the opposite.
thats cool, but you were challenging my point that the original Mac was a computer, despite the fact that you couldnt not write Mac program on it. a Lisa was needed, tho later some people hacked a way to do it on an Apple ][. later Macs gained the environment to code on it.
but it would be insane for anyone to claim the original Mac was not a computer, right?
Considering the devices that we carry with us everyday in our pockets or backpacks used to take up an entire building AND sent a man to the moon; plus how the vast majority of people actually USE those computers while doing little to no computing whatsoever to further mankind... I would suggest that me banging nonsensically on my piano just to make noise and piss off my parents in my youth should've been answered when they complained with, " Ah Mom... leave me alone... I'm just computering! "
IMHO: very little that gets done with computers today is "computing" just because there's mechanical reaction to human input. Mostly the equivalent of a monkey or a mouse pushing a button to get a piece of fruit, where the mouse often gets the bad deal and finds itself in a trap.
Get my drift? :smokey:
Actually, the Apple ][ had an Assembler, Integer BASIC, Graphics routines, etc. built into the ROM of the machine -- so it was a self-contained computer that could be used to program itself.
Yes, Lisa's were used to develop software for the original Macs -- especially since there were no Macs in existence while the Mac was being developed.
After the original Macs were released, the Lisa continued to be used because it had more robust software and hardware.
However, the original Macs had a lot of Software (QuickDraw, for example) in ROM and had a ROM low-level OS/CLI that could be used to program the Mac on the Mac.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_128K
This was enabled through a simple plastic "Programmers" key that attached through a vent in the side of the Mac. When pressed, this key would push a button on the Mac motherboard (provided especially for this purpose) and the Mac would go into CLI mode.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmer's_key
Later, as the Macs became more robust, a full SDK was provided.
FWIW, Apple had a Cray Maimframe that was used to develop software for the Mac (among other things).
So it begins ...