Whose Contributions Have Done More To Advance Modern Computing?

[Evil-Ernie]

I voted for Babbage as he was one of the early people to propose a computing device for practical use.

A person that I feel has been omitted is George Boole. Responsible for Boolean Algebra he provided number system (base 2 or binary) for electronic computers and without that we wouldnt of seen the evolution to the computers we see today.

How much you hate MS and Bill Gates you have to admit he was a catalyst to the improvement and development of PCs. In my opinion to have Steve Jobs on the list rather than The Woz is like having Steve Ballmer rather than Bill Gates! Jobs was the business and marketing man behind Apple just like Steve Ballmer is the same for Microsoft.

[Arex Bawrin]

POEM: ALAN TURING

here’s a toast to Alan Turing
born in harsher, darker times
who thought outside the container
and loved outside the lines
and so the code-breaker was broken
and we’re sorry
yes now the s-word has been spoken
the official conscience woken
– very carefully scripted but at least it’s not encrypted –
and the story does suggest
a part 2 to the Turing Test:
1. can machines behave like humans?
2. can we?

[Simian Man]

Alonzo Church should get more credit than Turing for the early theory work. Also John McCarthy was good as the inventor of Lisp and a major researcher in early AI. Grace Hopper also should be on the list. She worked on Univac, developed the first compiler, the wildly successful COBOL language and even coined the term "bug" after an actual bug got into a computer. Of those on your poll, I'd have to go with Knuth who, in addition to what you mentioned also developed the TeX typesetting system.

Stallman was influential in some ways, but I'd argue he's done nearly as much harm as good. Also the actual software he wrote is pretty awful in my opinion, so I wouldn't say he was a "computer pioneer". Likewise Gates and Jobs are more businessmen than engineers.

[clanky]

All of there contributions have made computing what it is today, for good or bad. They have all had a profound impact on their own sphere, but it is almost impossible to say whose contribution was the biggest.

I would, however, say that of the entire list Stallman made the smallest contribution.

[julio_cortez]

People like you are the reason Linux users aren't taken seriously. Stop writing crap.

Indeed that sentence wasn't meant to be taken seriously.
On the other hand, people like you must be the reason why using a little sarcasm in sentences (like the one I posted and you argued on) is still so funny.

[unknownPoster]

Without that dude there would be no free Linux, no free BSD, no free anything.

He persuaded the Berkeley project to free their OS and Linus was inspired by a speech of his. Without BSD going free, MINIX wouldn't have either.

So basically we'd all be doomed to proprietary UNIX or horrible DOS-like OSes.

I'm still not sure that would be a bad thing. Personally, I don't feel any ideological ties for or against FLOSS or proprietary software. I use the best tool for the job, whether it's free or proprietary, but that's just my personal decision.

I think what many people are trying to say is that compared to people like Turing and Babbage, RMS's contributions are relatively insignificant. That's not to say that RMS hasn't affected the world of computing. It's just that without RMS we wouldn't have GNU or the FSF, but without people like Babbage or Turing, we wouldn't have computers.

TL;DR version:

Without the contributions of people like Turing and Babbage, the work/contributions of RMS/Gates/Jobs/etc. never would have happened. In an analogy, "No one gives a damn about the paint job, if the engine doesn't run."

[koenn]

All of there contributions have made computing what it is today, for good or bad. They have all had a profound impact on their own sphere, but it is almost impossible to say whose contribution was the biggest.

I would, however, say that of the entire list Stallman made the smallest contribution.

They've all done impressive things, but that's not the same as "contributing to modern computing" Babbage's stuff is very impressive, and way ahead of it's time, but that also made it an evolutionary dead end with little or no influence on today's computing.

Jobs contributed to turning computers in consumer electronics. Impressive, but there's more to computing than a phone with a screen, or a mobile audio player. Similer for Gates.

I'd say Torvals and Stallman are a bit higher up the ladder - somewhere in the middle. Torvalds not for writing a kernel, but for inventing the "distributed development over the internet" approach (or, if he didn't invent it, at least he put it on the map). He (self-admittedly) couldn't have done that without the GPL. Hence: Stallman.


The real impact is from guys that made up the mathematical / theoretical framework, or engineered the machines that proofed the theorie correct. They shaped the future and created the circumstances that made all the rest possible - Turing furst, Knuth probably (don't know too much about him) , and probably numerous others that never got into the spotlights.

[aG93IGRvIGkgdWJ1bnR1Pw==]

I would, however, say that of the entire list Stallman made the smallest contribution.

You mean other than refusing unethical corporations with criminal business practices and armies of rabid lawyers a de facto monopoly on computing?

Stallman and activists like him are the only reason we're still living in a somewhat free society. Don't for a moment assume that anyone who only works for his personal profit cares about your rights as a human being. All of the advances in computer science are irrelevant if they're being used to oppress society and restrict basic human rights. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have helped advance technology only at the cost of human values and rights. As the Free Software Foundation has shown, technology can advance without restricting human rights or access to that technology. It is wrong to celebrate the achievements of those who use their achievements to benefit themselves at the cost of others.

[Phrea]

Just clued in for me that Steve Wozniak is not on the list.

I wanted to complain about that !

[unknownPoster]

You mean other than refusing unethical corporations with criminal business practices and armies of rabid lawyers a de facto monopoly on computing?

Stallman and activists like him are the only reason we're still living in a somewhat free society. Don't for a moment assume that anyone who only works for his personal profit cares about your rights as a human being. All of the advances in computer science are irrelevant if they're being used to oppress society and restrict basic human rights. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have helped advance technology only at the cost of human values and rights. As the Free Software Foundation has shown, technology can advance without restricting human rights or access to that technology. It is wrong to celebrate the achievements of those who use their achievements to benefit themselves at the cost of others.

Oh that's strange, I'm about to graduate with a degree in Computer Science and I guess I forgot to take "Computer Science 666 - Oppression of human rights."

If Stallman is so important, why is he never mentioned in history books? RMS has only been mentioned by one of my professors and it was a negative comment. RMS couldn't be a fraction of what he is w/o Turing or Babbage or Lovelace, or (person that actually contributed to computer science/computing)

And don't say it's because we're anti-FOSS. Part of our curriculum is learning Unix (esp. Solaris), and majority of our lab computers run CentOS.