This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
-- TedColes ( talk) 12:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
This text's reference 13 (to the claim about Zuse's two patents) isn't correct. It points to Nature's text where Williams & Kilburn describe Manchester "baby". That text certainly doesn't talk about Zuse's patents.
Apparently some people say it is "historically inappropriate, to refer to electronic stored-program digital computers as 'von Neumann machines'".
So what do those people say is the historically appropriate use of those two terms? Are these people saying there is some subtle distinction (or perhaps one is a subset category of the other) between stored-program computers and von Neumann mmachines? If so, what is that distinction?
Or are those people saying that the machines that people call "von Neumann machines" are identically the same as (synonymous with) "stored program computers", but it is anachronistic to apply von Neumann's name to machines that were developed before von Neumann ever thought of such machines? If so, please merge the appropriate parts of the von Neumann architecture article into this stored-program computer article. -- DavidCary ( talk) 18:46, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
A paper documenting the history of the concept: ‘Stored Program Concept' Considered Harmful Diego ( talk) 15:33, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
The article says: "The third stored-program computer to be built, and the first one in continental Europe, was the MESM, completed in the Soviet Union in 1951." But EDVAC was completed in 1949, and it isn't listed. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
The article says that the ARC2 came online in May 1948. But did it run a stored program? The article about the development of the APE(X)C says that it wasn't completed until June 1952.
Early British Computers, by S. Lavington, page 63 says that the APE(R)C - different from the APE(X)C, I believe - "was operating with limited storage in July 1952." It doesn't mention the APE(X)C. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:29, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
"The Development of Computer Programming in Britan (1945-1955)" by Martin Cambell-Kelly, in Annals of the History of Computing", vol 4, #2, lists APEXC as 1953. But I need to read the whole article to see what it says about APEXC. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
It sounds like pretty much every computer today would fit into this category. Shouldn't there be a mention of that in the article? flarn2006 [ u t c] time: 20:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
-- TedColes ( talk) 12:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
This text's reference 13 (to the claim about Zuse's two patents) isn't correct. It points to Nature's text where Williams & Kilburn describe Manchester "baby". That text certainly doesn't talk about Zuse's patents.
Apparently some people say it is "historically inappropriate, to refer to electronic stored-program digital computers as 'von Neumann machines'".
So what do those people say is the historically appropriate use of those two terms? Are these people saying there is some subtle distinction (or perhaps one is a subset category of the other) between stored-program computers and von Neumann mmachines? If so, what is that distinction?
Or are those people saying that the machines that people call "von Neumann machines" are identically the same as (synonymous with) "stored program computers", but it is anachronistic to apply von Neumann's name to machines that were developed before von Neumann ever thought of such machines? If so, please merge the appropriate parts of the von Neumann architecture article into this stored-program computer article. -- DavidCary ( talk) 18:46, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
A paper documenting the history of the concept: ‘Stored Program Concept' Considered Harmful Diego ( talk) 15:33, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
The article says: "The third stored-program computer to be built, and the first one in continental Europe, was the MESM, completed in the Soviet Union in 1951." But EDVAC was completed in 1949, and it isn't listed. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:48, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
The article says that the ARC2 came online in May 1948. But did it run a stored program? The article about the development of the APE(X)C says that it wasn't completed until June 1952.
Early British Computers, by S. Lavington, page 63 says that the APE(R)C - different from the APE(X)C, I believe - "was operating with limited storage in July 1952." It doesn't mention the APE(X)C. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:29, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
"The Development of Computer Programming in Britan (1945-1955)" by Martin Cambell-Kelly, in Annals of the History of Computing", vol 4, #2, lists APEXC as 1953. But I need to read the whole article to see what it says about APEXC. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
It sounds like pretty much every computer today would fit into this category. Shouldn't there be a mention of that in the article? flarn2006 [ u t c] time: 20:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)