I had a beautiful TI scientific calculator (don't know the model, but it was landscape orientation which I really liked) that got lost/stolen. I looked for that thing for weeks before giving up getting a series of cheap Casios over the years. I finally got fed up with always having to convert the default display fractions to scientific notation and got an HP again (35s) and RPN - love it.
I must be the only intelligent person in the world who still prefers a “regular” calculator to RPN? For routine things like calculating power supply voltages, bias points, parallel resistors, cutoff frequency, doing load lines…..
Although if a Windows computer is up and running I usually just pull up Excel instead of a useless calculator app.
Although if a Windows computer is up and running I usually just pull up Excel instead of a useless calculator app.
The Bullet train, Jumbo jet, Concord, the space shuttle, Hawker Siddeley Harrior, all designed with slide rules and drawing boards (and most properbly countless scribbles on scrapes of paper) - and at a time before you could find out stuff on google to help); it's almost as if making it harder, made people use their brains more.
Before PDP-11, and before PDP-8?
The earliest PDP-8 model, informally known as a "Straight-8", was introduced on 22 March 1965...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-8
On April 7, 1964, IBM unveiled the first mainframe computer system, System/360.
https://community.ibm.com/community/user/ibmz-and-linuxone/blogs/destination-z1/2019/12/23/a-brief-history-of-the-mainframe-world#:~:text=On April 7, 1964, IBM,applications onto a single system.
In 1959, CDC released a 48-bit transistorized version of their re-design of the 1103 re-design [12] under the name CDC 1604...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_Data_Corporation
Last edited:
Just skimming the thread but suggest "The Trees" from '78's Hemispheres is more on point today.
For a long time after. Computer time was expensIve and it took time to program. For everyday tasks there was a slide rule. Cheap and available.
Preference already implies 'better'. Who 'prefers' worse? From birth nearly every reproduced sound you've ever heard originated from a direct radiator. What does it mean to prefer the sound of a direct radiator relative to accuracy to source?
DBT tests, having hardware in the middle, are often viewed as a magic bullet removing all concerns for the human software at either end; the experimental design and interpretation. I provide two examples in this thread - the potential for electro/acoustic second order cancellation between electronics and transducers, and the experimenter's 'trust the manufacturer's spec' on performance - that I feel tank more than a few widely accepted experimental results. But once those results are formalized as data it's considered beyond human manipulation, a position few maintain in accounting.
One final aspect is that once a debate become as energetically socialized as this one the boundaries blur between pursuing hard science and enforcing convention. It doesn't appear all that hard to structure at least a DB protocol which limits objections to constraints that either can't be met or so delimit the scope of 'real difference' as to be meaningless.
Sure. Yet, computers were likely used for some purposes when it comes to designing something like the space shuttle. After all, it even has a computer inside it (with magnetic core memory, IIRC).
They used a Grid laptop - Compass - on space shuttles. I designed a modem for it... 🙂
I've still got one in the archives (well attic 🙂 ). Along with an Osborne 1 "portable pc".
I've still got one in the archives (well attic 🙂 ). Along with an Osborne 1 "portable pc".
Dunning-Kruger?, Doubling down I see. Vastly entertaining! I read nothing in my retort to implicate a pseudoscientific approach.
Yes, the question, "which do you prefer" implies a subjective conclusion. Rather, the fellow who is convinced he can hear a 0.5 Db difference in volume I would play some white-noise....very much in the old optometrist parlance as he's switching lenses...which is louder?, A or B, ...again A, B....A, B.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick...
Fits you to a T.
So true.
-----------------------
You still don't seem to understand that I have nothing at all against any kind of blind testing. None.
I'm only discrediting the quacks like you, who, due to Dunning-Kruger effect, believe you are qualified to conduct DBT when they aren't. No surprise if you don't see it. If you think I'm wrong, would you care to describe your expertise and knowledge in that area? Please do elucidate, if you can. Not holding my breath.
Quack:
...any person who pretends to have knowledge or skill that he or she does not have in a particular field; charlatan
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/quack#:~:text=noun-,1.,does not possess; a charlatan
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.