PDA

View Full Version : Whose Contributions Have Done More To Advance Modern Computing?



ve4cib
December 12th, 2010, 08:06 PM
Which of the following people's contributions to the world of computing do you think has made the greatest impact on modern computing?

- Charles Babbage: Creator of the first general-purpose clockwork computer designs in the 1800s: the difference engine and the analytical engine. Arguably the first computer engineer in history.

- Ada Lovelace: If Babbage was the first computer engineer then Lady Lovelace is the first programmer. Wrote the first "programs" for Babbage's engines.

- Alan Turing: 20th Century pioneer in computing and discrete math. Invented the "Turing Machine" -- a theoretical model of computing that still accurately represents everything modern computers can do.

- Dennis Richie: With others he developed C -- arguably the most wide-spread and heavily-used programming language in history, and helped design the first version of Unix. Almost every major piece of software since then has inherited something from this work.

- Donald Knuth: Formalized modern computer science as a very mathematical field. Wrote the seminal works on modern programming and algorithm design/analysis.

- Richard Stallman: Pioneered the Free Sofware movement and continues to lobby on behalf of free and open-source computing for the masses.

- Linus Torvalds: Developed the Linux Kernel, the core of a vast array of operating systems used in everything from super-computers to desktops to embedded systems.

- Bill Gates: Popularized home computing for the masses via his company, Microsoft, and provided one of the world's first mass-market, universal computing platforms -- a position still dominated by Windows.

- Steve Jobs: Popularized hand-held, mobile computing via his company, Apple and their flagship mobile products, the iPhone and iPad.

- Other: I can only have 10 poll entries, so if I missed someone you think is important please speak up!

cpmman
December 12th, 2010, 08:47 PM
Tim Berners-Lee

Without his contribution this forum/the internet/the reason why most people want to use computers would not exist.

Zzl1xndd
December 12th, 2010, 08:53 PM
I went with Linus as I believe that FOSS is advancing Modern tech at breakneck speed. It was tempting to pick RMS, however without Linus work I don't think FOSS would be where it is today.

Dixon Bainbridge
December 12th, 2010, 09:03 PM
Konrad Zuse

cgroza
December 12th, 2010, 09:07 PM
Who dared to vote Billy? :lolflag:

lightningfox
December 12th, 2010, 09:16 PM
Dennis Ritchie, followed by Richard Stallman.

FOSS and Linux would never have existed if Richard Stallman hadn't started the GNU Project and Free Software Foundation.

lightningfox
December 12th, 2010, 09:18 PM
Dennis Ritchie, followed by Richard Stallman.

FOSS and Linux would never have existed if Richard Stallman hadn't started the GNU Project and Free Software Foundation.

If Linus Torvalds hadn't created Linux we would still have other free operating systems like BSD.

handy
December 13th, 2010, 01:43 AM
Niklaus Wirth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niklaus_Wirth

Created one of the first workstations - Lilith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilith_%28computer%29) - (1977 work began) that used a GUI, & is the most influential designer of programming languages the world has ever known.

Alan Kay: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Kay

Probably followed by Steve Jobs, who when he saw Kay's work at Xerox PARC, basically grabbed Kay, & made the Macintosh OS, which was the first GUI available for the general public to buy. After that it has been Windows trying to play catch-up forever, & the other GUI's do what they do.

Arex Bawrin
December 13th, 2010, 02:46 AM
Jon Von Neumann:Used Turing's paper of 1936 to construct the Von Neumann Architecutre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_architecture)

I wanted to vote for Turing but I thought I'd throw Jon's name out there.

Zzl1xndd
December 13th, 2010, 02:56 AM
Just clued in for me that Steve Wozniak is not on the list. Woz would be a very close second for me.

StephenDavison
December 13th, 2010, 05:23 AM
Alonzo Church deserves mention with Alan Turing for the Church-Turing Thesis.

Woz must be named with Jobs.

Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore: founders of Intel. I guess they're "other."

DARPA. Not a person, but hey, who can deny it has been most influential.

WinterMadness
December 13th, 2010, 05:31 AM
i voted bill gates, because he played a huge role in the popularity of pcs

Austin25
December 13th, 2010, 06:11 AM
I voted Alan Turing, but IMHO, Ada Lovelace at least beats Steve Jobs.

weasel fierce
December 13th, 2010, 06:14 AM
The heads of Commodore for getting computers into common people's homes, rather than being a 1000+ dollar business tool.

Also for proving twice that quality doesn't have to mean inflated prices

ve4cib
December 13th, 2010, 06:32 AM
I knew that there would be a lot of write-ins. Only being able to list 10 choices is annoying. Well, 9 since I wanted to include "Other."

Wozniak was going to be the next on the list if I'd had more space. Looking back, I probably could have combined Lady Ada and Mr Babbage, or skipped one or the other. *shrug* Whatever. Write-ins leads to more discussion.

The reason I didn't include Wozniak with Jobs was that -- to me anyway -- Steve Job's major contribution has been to portable computing in the last 5 years or so. The iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad have all succeeded at pushing pocketable computers forward in leaps and bounds. Wozniak's contributions generally occurred before that craze hit is, hence separating the two.


Personally I voted for Richie (et al.). I think C's contributions to computer programming are pretty well invaluable. Everything these days is written either directly in C, or in a C/C++ derivative, like Java or C#.

Much as it pains me to say it, in terms of modern computing, I think Bill Gates and Microsoft really deserve a lot of credit. Windows is really what made personal computing possible in a reasonable, anyone-can-use-a-computer way. Yes, they achieved their market dominance through questionable practices, but they succeeded in developing the standard personal computing platform. Anyone who's used a computer knows how to use Windows because Windows has shaped the look-and-feel of computing for about two decades. Windows -- like it or not -- defined what modern computing is to the masses.

I'll also submit a write-in of my own for consideration: Brendan Eich (et al.). If the web is what we use computers for most, then Javascript and its creators surely deserve some credit. Javascript is what gives us dynamic web pages and powers a lot of web applications. "Web 2.0" wouldn't have been possible without this contribution, and as HTML5 continues to be pushed forward, JS is going to become increasingly important.

julio_cortez
December 13th, 2010, 08:38 AM
William Gates III. Because every new OS of Microsoft requires 2x the CPU power, the GPU power and the RAM of the ones required by its predecessor.
So Microsoft is the ultimate responsible for hardware specs being better and better over time.

No, seriously: I respect Ritchie a lot being C the first language I really learnt, but I really think that without Microsoft computing wouldn't be this advanced. They are responsible of making available for the common people the most-used desktop environment ever, so they surely are to take into account.
Then, people writing software for Windows that is more and more demanding made good part of the rest of the growth of CPU/GPU/RAM/HD specs.

Yownanymous
December 13th, 2010, 08:43 AM
Why is Stallman even on this list? All he did was take credit for a text editor and write a particularly flawed license. You seriously cannot compare Stallman to someone like Turing.

Yownanymous
December 13th, 2010, 08:45 AM
William Gates III. Because every new OS of Microsoft requires 2x the CPU power, the GPU power and the RAM of the ones required by its predecessor.
So Microsoft is the ultimate responsible for hardware specs being better and better over time.

](*,)
People like you are the reason Linux users aren't taken seriously. Stop writing crap.

handy
December 13th, 2010, 08:54 AM
Why is Stallman even on this list? All he did was take credit for a text editor and write a particularly flawed license. You seriously cannot compare Stallman to someone like Turing.

Stallman has the balls to stand up against the corporations. He is extreme, which anyone who combats the corporate mentality must be.

Stallman, like him or lump him personality wise is worthy of extreme respect, as he made GNU happen, without which the computing world that we know would be nowhere near as free as it is now.

He isn't perfect, the GNU licenses aren't perfect.

Show me a person & a license that is?

By the way, I believe that he had a great deal to do with creating the GCC compiler also.

Spice Weasel
December 13th, 2010, 01:15 PM
Why is Stallman even on this list? All he did was take credit for a text editor and write a particularly flawed license. You seriously cannot compare Stallman to someone like Turing.

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.

Evil-Ernie
December 13th, 2010, 02:41 PM
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
December 13th, 2010, 03:18 PM
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
December 13th, 2010, 03:45 PM
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
December 13th, 2010, 05:09 PM
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
December 13th, 2010, 05:11 PM
](*,)
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
December 13th, 2010, 07:07 PM
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
December 13th, 2010, 07:29 PM
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==
December 13th, 2010, 07:42 PM
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
December 13th, 2010, 07:45 PM
Just clued in for me that Steve Wozniak is not on the list.

I wanted to complain about that ! :P

unknownPoster
December 13th, 2010, 07:56 PM
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.

koenn
December 13th, 2010, 08:07 PM
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)


Maybe because it's to early to write history books about this era ?
Maybe because it's to soon to judge whether this Free / Open Source thing is going to last and have any serious impact on the computing field ?

RiceMonster
December 13th, 2010, 08:34 PM
technology can advance without restricting human rights

Agreed. Technology has advanced at an incredible rate, and I have yet to come across any technology that denies my human rights.

Dr. C
December 13th, 2010, 09:43 PM
Agreed. Technology has advanced at an incredible rate, and I have yet to come across any technology that denies my human rights.

I have. It is called DRM and it interferes with articles 12, 17, 18, 19, 26 and 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights).

I picked Stallman because of his invention of copyleft software licensing, as manifested for example in the GPL. This has made possible the development of most FLOSS, including for example the Linux kernel. Another very important contribution is the anti DRM provisions in GPLv3; although this is likely to be seen in the future as a vital contribution to fields such as history, archeology, literature, library science and the preservation of human knowledge.

kvant
December 13th, 2010, 09:49 PM
Why is Stallman even on this list? All he did was take credit for a text editor and write a particularly flawed license. You seriously cannot compare Stallman to someone like Turing.

I might take you seriously and start a serious argument with you if you haven't shown lack of basic computer history knowledge here. You're the best advertiser for the opposite of what you're saying.

kvant
December 13th, 2010, 09:54 PM
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.

"If my professors and my college books don't mention something than it must be bad or not important." That's your position, right? Because using your own brain is so bad, especially if it's washed by the megacorp propaganda.

Also, Unix itself has little to do with FOSS, so I don't get your last sentence. BTW, did you notice that on 95% of software on those lab computers there's a licence written by RMS? Pretty good achievement for somebody insignificant.

kvant
December 13th, 2010, 09:57 PM
Agreed. Technology has advanced at an incredible rate, and I have yet to come across any technology that denies my human rights.

Have you read the Microsoft licence that comes with your copy of Windows lately?

RiceMonster
December 13th, 2010, 10:00 PM
Have you read the Microsoft licence that comes with your copy of Windows lately?

Yep. Which part denies my human rights, exactly?

kvant
December 13th, 2010, 10:02 PM
Yep. Which part denies my human rights, exactly?

The part about trolls.

unknownPoster
December 13th, 2010, 10:03 PM
"If my professors and my college books don't mention something than it must be bad or not important." That's your position, right? Because using your own brain is so bad, especially if it's washed by the megacorp propaganda.

Also, Unix itself has little to do with FOSS, so I don't get your last sentence. BTW, did you notice that on 95% of software on those lab computers there's a licence written by RMS? Pretty good achievement for somebody insignificant.

Oh I use my brain all time. However, from an objective perspective it seems as all of this RMS fanboyism is as equally brainwashed as being washed by the megacorp propaganda.

You fail to see my logic. RMS's contributions would mean absolutely nothing if not for the work of Turing/Babbage/etc.

This blind praise for one of the most obscure figures of Computer Science is worse than the windows and mac fan boys.

Tristam Green
December 13th, 2010, 10:04 PM
especially if it's washed by the megacorp propaganda.


CentOS

what?

unknownPoster
December 13th, 2010, 10:05 PM
Yep. Which part denies my human rights, exactly?


The part about trolls.

Show me the actual lines that denies human rights, Kvant.

Otherwise you are the troll for spreading FUD.

Tristam Green
December 13th, 2010, 10:05 PM
Yep. Which part denies my human rights, exactly?

Article 2, Section A, Paragraph b.29.3: "If you do not agree to pay with money, services rendered may be tendered by indentured servitude to Microsoft Corporation"


*edit* wait, that's not in there?

Simian Man
December 13th, 2010, 10:06 PM
I have. It is called DRM and it interferes with articles 12, 17, 18, 19, 26 and 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights).

No it doesn't.

12 (the right to privacy) - how does DRM affect privacy?
17 (right to own property) - You have the right to own property, but not to own *ANY* property. That's like saying the existence of rental homes violates human rights.
18 (freedom of thought) - DRM doesn't affect freedom of thought at all.
19 (freedom of expression) - Again how does DRM or proprietary software affect this in the least?
26 (right to education) - Are you saying you have the right to read source code so you can learn from it? Do I have the right to read your email so I can learn from it.
27 (intellectual property) - This one actually protects the rights of software authors to protect their creations, so I don't see what you're arguing.

If you don't like DRM, then don't use products that use it. The idea that proprietary software violates a fundamental human right that the UDHR was written to protect is actually fairly offensive. People are still being tortured in this world and you care about this???

Dr. C
December 13th, 2010, 10:12 PM
No it doesn't.

12 (the right to privacy) - how does DRM affect privacy?
17 (right to own property) - You have the right to own property, but not to own *ANY* property. That's like saying the existence of rental homes violates human rights.
18 (freedom of thought) - DRM doesn't affect freedom of thought at all.
19 (freedom of expression) - Again how does DRM or proprietary software affect this in the least?
26 (right to education) - Are you saying you have the right to read source code so you can learn from it? Do I have the right to read your email so I can learn from it.
27 (intellectual property) - This one actually protects the rights of software authors to protect their creations, so I don't see what you're arguing.

If you don't like DRM, then don't use products that use it. The idea that proprietary software violates a fundamental human right that the UDHR was written to protect is actually fairly offensive. People are still being tortured in this world and you care about this???

Who said anything about propriety software. Microsoft sold propriety software for 15 years without infecting it with DRM.

Tristam Green
December 13th, 2010, 10:17 PM
without infecting it with DRM.

Infection. I do not think the word does not mean what you think it means. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infection)

DRM certainly isn't self-replicating.
It doesn't seek reproduction.
It doesn't cause disease.

kvant
December 13th, 2010, 10:18 PM
Infection. I do not think the word does not mean what you think it means. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infection)

DRM certainly isn't self-replicating.
It doesn't seek reproduction.
It doesn't cause disease.

Good that you've discovered Wikipedia, now use it a bit more and you'll be super.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphore)

BTW, they teach those things in primary school where I live.

unknownPoster
December 13th, 2010, 10:21 PM
Good that you've discovered Wikipedia, now use it a bit more and you'll be super.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphore)

BTW, they teach those things in primary school where I live.

The correct spelling of that word is "Metaphor."

BTW, they teach those things in primary school where I live.

Linux_junkie
December 13th, 2010, 10:26 PM
The question was who contributed the most to advance modern computing and for that answer has got to be a toss up between Bill Gates / Microsoft and Steve Jobs / Apple as it was these two organisations that had pushed pc's in to peoples homes. Linus is great for creating Linux but as of yet it has not yet become a popular OS. Like it or not Windows is still the No. 1 OS around the world and because its so hungary for resources pc's have got bigger and faster a lot since the 80's.

koenn
December 13th, 2010, 10:35 PM
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.
And, predictably, adding that final sentence was all it took to let the thread degrade to a pro/contra Stallman war.

http://users.telenet.be/mydotcom/graph/bartsimpsoneasy.png

koenn
December 13th, 2010, 10:40 PM
The question was who contributed the most to advance modern computing and for that answer has got to be a toss up between Bill Gates / Microsoft and Steve Jobs / Apple as it was these two organisations that had pushed pc's in to peoples homes. Linus is great for creating Linux but as of yet it has not yet become a popular OS. Like it or not Windows is still the No. 1 OS around the world and because its so hungary for resources pc's have got bigger and faster a lot since the 80's.

true, if you limit modern computing to home computers (and various hand-helds)

Mister Shark
December 13th, 2010, 10:43 PM
Good that you've discovered Wikipedia, now use it a bit more and you'll be super.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphore)

BTW, they teach those things in primary school where I live.

What?! You can do better than that.

Anyway, the point still stands: no one twists your arm when using DRM.
Also, I'm very disappointed that no one thought to include Rear Admiral Grace Hopper in this list. IMO, Grace Hopper did more for computers than RMS. To echo what Jeremiah said earlier, if it werent for Turing, Lovelace, et al. there wouldn't be anything for Stallman to advocate.

Dr. C
December 13th, 2010, 10:44 PM
Yep. Which part denies my human rights, exactly?

As an example of where DRM violates human rights consider the right to privacy (article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). In Canada the Privacy Commissioner identified how the right to privacy was violated by DRM in her letter. http://www.priv.gc.ca/parl/2008/let_080118_e.cfm In response to this the proposed Copyright Act amendments contain an exception to the anti circumvention provisions specifically for the protection of privacy. So yes privacy is a human right and it is violated by DRM.

As far as the EULA of any particular corporation is concerned if it contains provisions to protect DRM then by extension it also violates human rights.

matt_symes
December 13th, 2010, 10:46 PM
Most of you guys are just talking about the software.

What about the hardware?

The inventors of the electronic valve, transistor and microchip. They have done a lot for modern computing.

What value do you place on them?

Try not do descend into an argument about freedom ;)

Dr. C
December 13th, 2010, 11:01 PM
Most of you guys are just talking about the software.

What about the hardware?

The inventors of the electronic valve, transistor and microchip. They have done a lot for modern computing.

What value do you place on them?

Try not do descend into an argument about freedom ;)

That is where Charles Babbage comes in who was my second choice after Richard M Stallman. Had his steam powered Analytical Engine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_engine) been built it would have revolutionized computing well before the invention of the electronic valve, transistor and microchip.

Giant Speck
December 13th, 2010, 11:10 PM
The chemical properties of silicon have done more for modern computing than any puny human has.

Tibuda
December 13th, 2010, 11:13 PM
The chemical properties of silicon have done more for modern computing than any puny human has.

Or G'd who created silicon, and the human programmers.

Mister Shark
December 13th, 2010, 11:23 PM
Or G'd who created silicon, and the human programmers.

Don't forget the creation of caffeine and booze.... you know --for the human programmers to maintain consciousness and sanity.

koenn
December 13th, 2010, 11:32 PM
Had his steam powered Analytical Engine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_engine) been built it would have revolutionized computing well before the invention of the electronic valve, transistor and microchip.
Nah, it doesn't scale.
The fast evolution in computing in the past decades has at least partially been made possible by the use of electricity and the miniaturization of the electronic components. You'd never get that kind of growth in processing power with a mechanical contraption.

So to answer the other question as well, I think hardware isn't all that important. It's a facilitator for software, and that's where the real work is done. In that respect, the punch cards for the Jacquard loom probably have had more impact on modern computing than Baggage's machines.

TeoBigusGeekus
December 13th, 2010, 11:41 PM
I've voted for Bill. I still admire the SOAB.

BigCityCat
December 13th, 2010, 11:53 PM
I would have voted for capitalism and money but it wasn't on the list, so I took the next best option.

matt_symes
December 14th, 2010, 01:00 AM
Had his steam powered...Actually that quite a funny idea. I could be playing COD while my PC brews me a cuppa tea ;)

For me though its Turing

Gremlinzzz
December 14th, 2010, 01:26 AM
The recovery in Roswell new Mexico and area 51 for reverse engineering'

sanderd17
December 14th, 2010, 01:31 AM
I went for Turing, otherwise programmers could keep searching better algorithms without knowing there isn't a better one.

With Turing's theory, you can at least think about complexity and computability.

BTW, I'm a mathematician

JDShu
December 14th, 2010, 03:17 AM
Had to go with Knuth. He seems to pop up EVERYWHERE. Just a bit less than Djikstra.

amauk
December 14th, 2010, 04:13 AM
4. Dennis Ritchie (and Ken Thompson, Brian Kernighan, etc.) for creating the C programming language
Because without C, there'd be precious little software to run at all
Other languages obviously predate C, but all were catered for specific tasks, and none were used to write operating systems
Before C, all low level programming was done in assembly
C was the first high-level (in the traditional sense) programming language that was fast and efficient enough to allow an operating system to transcend from being bespoke and hardware specific to being fully general purpose, therefore paved the way for modern software engineering.

3. Linus Torvalds (and of course all kernel contributors) for creating the OS kernel we here all use.
Linux is revolutionary on so many levels, but I'll pick one for brevity - Versatility
No other OS in history has been so expertly designed and thoughtfully structured that it operates from the smallest embedded devices to the largest super-cluster.
It is without a doubt the OS equivalent of the sonic screwdriver, excels at any task

2. Dennis Ritchie (and Ken Thompson, Brian Kernighan, etc.) for creating Unix
For without Unix, there would be no reference model for how to produce a good general purpose operating system.
Unix's legacy is best shown in the timeless nature of it's inner workings, which are still used (largely unchanged) in modern descendants (BSD, Solaris, etc.) and the unix-like clones (Linux, NextStep)
This entry would be top of the list, if it were not for one single flaw
The fall of Unix into proprietary chaos.

1. Richard Stallman
RMS's work is supreme beyond question
Without him, there would be no GNU project
The GNU project (and related independent projects under the GNU license) have demonstrated time after time that it can out-do proprietary software
Who doesn't use GCC as their compiler?
Who doesn't use the GNU C library (or forks thereof)?
Who doesn't use Busybox in their embedded device?
The list is endless
And of course, the GPL, which maintains software freedom and ensures that the 1980's Unix-style fall into proprietary chaos does not repeat itself

Dustin2128
December 14th, 2010, 04:21 AM
seriously- what's with all the flaming? Anyway, I'd have to go with Turing since he had the most to contribute to modern computers, but in a perfect world, Babbage would've built his computers and would be my choice- he could've advanced modern computing by over a century with his designs. Even if they weren't terribly scalable, they were still more advanced than most of the computers a hundred years later and could've advanced us in unbelievable ways if they had been constructed.

matt_symes
December 14th, 2010, 04:30 AM
amauka

I agree with point 2, but the rest i am am not so sure of.

3. C, yes an amazing language, but too many holes for the inexperienced and the experienced (buffer overflow anyone).

The rest are very, very noteworthy and should be lauded

But Turing..

alphacrucis2
December 14th, 2010, 05:26 AM
C is by no means the earliest structured programming language. Algol dates back to the late 1950's and a variation of it was used for writing the OS of the old Burroughs mainframes before C or unix existed.

jerenept
December 14th, 2010, 05:44 AM
4. Dennis Ritchie (and Ken Thompson, Brian Kernighan, etc.) for creating the C programming language
Because without C, there'd be precious little software to run at all
Other languages obviously predate C, but all were catered for specific tasks, and none were used to write operating systems
Before C, all low level programming was done in assembly
C was the first high-level (in the traditional sense) programming language that was fast and efficient enough to allow an operating system to transcend from being bespoke and hardware specific to being fully general purpose, therefore paved the way for modern software engineering.


Sounds good, credit where it is due.....

3. Linus Torvalds (and of course all kernel contributors) for creating the OS kernel we here all use.
Linux is revolutionary on so many levels, but I'll pick one for brevity - Versatility
No other OS in history has been so expertly designed and thoughtfully structured that it operates from the smallest embedded devices to the largest super-cluster.
It is without a doubt the OS equivalent of the sonic screwdriver, excels at any task

Except one it seems.......


2. Dennis Ritchie (and Ken Thompson, Brian Kernighan, etc.) for creating Unix
For without Unix, there would be no reference model for how to produce a good general purpose operating system.
Unix's legacy is best shown in the timeless nature of it's inner workings, which are still used (largely unchanged) in modern descendants (BSD, Solaris, etc.) and the unix-like clones (Linux, NextStep)
This entry would be top of the list, if it were not for one single flaw
The fall of Unix into proprietary chaos.

"Fall into proprietary chaos"? REALLY? The most popular form of UNIX today (BSD Unix) is completely free and open source under the BSD License. What are you talking about?

1. Richard Stallman
RMS's work is supreme beyond question

?????

Without him, there would be no GNU project
The GNU project (and related independent projects under the GNU license) have demonstrated time after time that it can out-do proprietary software
We're going to need examples of this, you know.....
Like GNU/HURD? or Gnash?

Who doesn't use GCC as their compiler?

Apple Computer, Microsoft, even BSD can leave gcc and start to use LLVM/Clang (the Linux kernel has already been successfully compiled using Clang)


Who doesn't use the GNU C library (or forks thereof)?Anybody who doesn't use Linux

Who doesn't use Busybox in their embedded device?
Anybody who doesn't use Linux (there is Symbian, for mobile devices)

The list is endless
No, it is not.


And of course, the GPL, which maintains software freedom and ensures that the 1980's Unix-style fall into proprietary chaos does not repeat itself
"Proprietary chaos" again....

The GPL seems to me to be a very restrictive license.... it does not allow true freedom, in the sense that linking libs and so forth to GPL'd programs has caused confusion (eg: proprietary plug-ins for WordPress (http://www.webmaster-source.com/2009/01/29/why-theyre-wrong-wordpress-plugins-shouldnt-have-to-be-gpl/))

Of course there is the whole "and later versions" thing too....



In my opinion, the most important person in computing, would definitely be Turing. Definitely. (No point in making a long post longer; and Dustin2128's post sums up my reasons nicely)

amauk
December 14th, 2010, 06:03 AM
"Fall into proprietary chaos"? REALLY? The most popular form of UNIX today (BSD Unix) is completely free and open source under the BSD License. What are you talking about?I'm talking about history

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=6557569&postcount=8


The GPL seems to me to be a very restrictive license.... it does not allow true freedomAlso, can we get away from this "GPL is restrictive" nonsense....
The GPL does one thing very well, and that's prevent software restriction (closing of the source - and in v3, patenting of the methodology)

BSD code can be closed
therefore software under BSD can be restricted

unknownPoster
December 14th, 2010, 07:12 AM
I'm talking about history

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=6557569&postcount=8

Also, can we get away from this "GPL is restrictive" nonsense....
The GPL does one thing very well, and that's prevent software restriction (closing of the source - and in v3, patenting of the methodology)

BSD code can be closed
therefore software under BSD can be restricted

Since when is citing yourself considered valid?

amauk
December 14th, 2010, 07:17 AM
Since when is citing yourself considered valid?when I can't find a better source

jerenept
December 14th, 2010, 07:22 AM
Since when is citing yourself considered valid?


when I can't find a better source

Now what does that tell you?

amauk
December 14th, 2010, 07:31 AM
Now what does that tell you?err....
that I said something a few years ago and it's still valid, so I thought posting a link to it would be more efficient than re-typing the whole lot?

what's quoting previous forum posts got to do with contributions to modern computing anyway?

alaukikyo
December 14th, 2010, 07:42 AM
The GPL seems to me to be a very restrictive license.... it does not allow true freedom,


the only freedom it doesn't allow is to make programs which do not give any freedom to the user

amauk
December 14th, 2010, 07:44 AM
the only freedom it doesn't allow is to make programs which do not give any freedom to the userprecisely
You are not free to take away the freedom

ve4cib
December 14th, 2010, 08:51 AM
Had to go with Knuth. He seems to pop up EVERYWHERE. Just a bit less than Djikstra.

Djikstra! I knew I was forgetting someone important! Man, some of my undergrad profs would kill me if they realized I forgot about him...

The more I get into graduate-level computer science the more and more Knuth's name seems to pop up. The man is everywhere. Even chemistry and biology students can't get away from him, since they write papers in LaTeX, which was invented by... Donald Knuth.

I knew as soon as I put Stallman in the original poll that people would get bogged-down and flamey. Which isn't entirely unexpected, I suppose.

I think to say that Stallman and the FSF haven't contributed anything would be unfair. The FSF -- and specifically the GNU tools -- find their way into a lot of pieces of software. The GCC if nothing else has surely contributed immensely to a lot of electronic devices we use regularly.

Likewise however, I don't think Stallman has contributed much that was necessarily essential to the current state of computing. Remember: the question was whose contributions have most influenced modern computing. And the fact that Free Software is not dominant in any way shape or form for the overwhelming majority of the computer-using world says to me that his contributions are minimal in the grand scheme of things. He's made his mark, but I think he's definitely over-shadowed by other figures in the computing world -- like the afore-mentioned Djikstra, Knuth, Wozniak, and Turing.

unknownPoster
December 14th, 2010, 08:54 AM
Djikstra! I knew I was forgetting someone important! Man, some of my undergrad profs would kill me if they realized I forgot about him...

The more I get into graduate-level computer science the more and more Knuth's name seems to pop up. The man is everywhere. Even chemistry and biology students can't get away from him, since they write papers in LaTeX, which was invented by... Donald Knuth.

I knew as soon as I put Stallman in the original poll that people would get bogged-down and flamey. Which isn't entirely unexpected, I suppose.

I think to say that Stallman and the FSF haven't contributed anything would be unfair. The FSF -- and specifically the GNU tools -- find their way into a lot of pieces of software. The GCC if nothing else has surely contributed immensely to a lot of electronic devices we use regularly.

Likewise however, I don't think Stallman has contributed much that was necessarily essential to the current state of computing. Remember: the question was whose contributions have most influenced modern computing. And the fact that Free Software is not dominant in any way shape or form for the overwhelming majority of the computer-using world says to me that his contributions are minimal in the grand scheme of things. He's made his mark, but I think he's definitely over-shadowed by other figures in the computing world -- like the afore-mentioned Djikstra, Knuth, Wozniak, and Turing.

That's exactly the point I've been trying to make the whole time. Perhaps people don't listen or I'm not good with words, or some other reason I don't know of.

ve4cib
December 14th, 2010, 08:59 AM
That's exactly the point I've been trying to make the whole time. Perhaps people don't listen or I'm not good with words, or some other reason I don't know of.

For what it's worth I agree with you. I think it's just the idealogical blinders people put on that are getting in the way of rational discourse.

Tristam Green
December 14th, 2010, 01:45 PM
For what it's worth I agree with you. I think it's just the idealogical blinders people put on that are getting in the way of rational discourse.

:popcorn:

Simian Man
December 14th, 2010, 02:14 PM
I think to say that Stallman and the FSF haven't contributed anything would be unfair. The FSF -- and specifically the GNU tools -- find their way into a lot of pieces of software. The GCC if nothing else has surely contributed immensely to a lot of electronic devices we use regularly.

That's true, but gcc as we know it today isn't even the version that was started by GNU. It is egcs, the version that Cygnus forked because Stallman was a control freak about what code was added. After that, GNU gcc died alone and friendless and egcs was renamed to gcc. Stallman has had nothing to do with gcc for over a decade.

And many of the other GNU tools are just archaic or badly designed: gdb, autotools, emacs, etc. Many are completely half-assed implementations of better technology: dotgnu, gnash, gnustep, etc. I'll drop the discussion of whether the FSF is important ideologically, because that will get us nowhere, and argue that their software just sucks :).

Viva
December 14th, 2010, 02:36 PM
Ritchie hands down.

TheNosh
December 14th, 2010, 03:02 PM
RMS's work is supreme beyond question

I question the supremacy of RMS's work.

Hmm... It would seem something is amiss.

Elfy
December 14th, 2010, 03:49 PM
Wellas the current consensus seems to be that the thread is actually about RMS - there's more than enough of those elsewhere so go and post in one of those.

This one is closed.