| Doug Englebart [message #93588] |
Wed, 03 July 2013 13:30  |
Al Kossow
Messages: 237
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
From: Christina Engelbart <christina.engelbart@gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 6:31 AM
Subject: update on my father
Very sorry to inform my father passed away in his sleep peacefully at home last night. His health had been deteriorating of late, and took turn for worse on the weekend. I will circle back around
soon, for now just wanted to give you all advance notice and look forward to discussing your thoughts as I am a bit fuzzy at present.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #93621 is a reply to message #93588] |
Wed, 03 July 2013 18:29  |
Walter Banks
Messages: 1000
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Al Kossow wrote:
> From: Christina Engelbart <christina.engelbart@gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 6:31 AM
> Subject: update on my father
>
> Very sorry to inform my father passed away in his sleep
> peacefully at home last night. His health had been deteriorating
> of late, and took turn for worse on the weekend. I will
> circle back around soon, for now just wanted to give you all
> advance notice and look forward to discussing your thoughts
> as I am a bit fuzzy at present.
Although he developed the mouse, it was more than that he
started a whole paradigm shift to pointing devices as a way
to communicate with computers. We owe him a lot. I met
him a few times 30+ years ago.
Last night we lost a computer pioneer.
Our condolences to his family, he will be fondly remembered.
Walter Banks
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #93622 is a reply to message #93588] |
Wed, 03 July 2013 18:29 |
Walter Banks
Messages: 1000
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Al Kossow wrote:
> From: Christina Engelbart <christina.engelbart@gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 6:31 AM
> Subject: update on my father
> Very sorry to inform my father passed away in his sleep
> peacefully at home last night. His health had been deteriorating
> of late, and took turn for worse on the weekend. I will
> circle back around soon, for now just wanted to give you all
> advance notice and look forward to discussing your thoughts
> as I am a bit fuzzy at present.
Although he developed the mouse, it was more than that he
started a whole paradigm shift to pointing devices as a way
to communicate with computers. We owe him a lot. I met
him a few times 30+ years ago.
Last night we lost a computer pioneer.
Our condolences to his family, he will be fondly remembered.
Walter Banks
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #93713 is a reply to message #93685] |
Thu, 04 July 2013 08:51 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> writes:
> Damn.
>
> He's known for the mouse, but that's least significant of his visions.
doug was at tymshare when m/d bought them ... and tymshare was running
his augment system on pdp10. i was brought in to audit/review gnosis for
spinoff to keykos. i was also asked if i could find anybody interested
at ibm to hire doug. i sent up some interviews ... but it was real
mismatch.
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #93772 is a reply to message #93685] |
Thu, 04 July 2013 14:58 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 4 Jul 2013, Patrick Scheible wrote:
> "Frank Pajerski" <fjp3.is.at@att.net> writes:
>
>> NYT obit .....
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/technology/douglas-c-engel bart-inventor-of-the-computer-mouse-dies-at-88.html
>>
>>
>>
>> "Al Kossow" wrote in message news:kr1mp1$2en$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>> From: Christina Engelbart <christina.engelbart@gmail.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 6:31 AM
>> Subject: update on my father
>>
>> Very sorry to inform my father passed away in his sleep peacefully at
>> home last night. His health had been deteriorating of late, and took
>> turn for worse on the weekend. I will circle back around
>> soon, for now just wanted to give you all advance notice and look
>> forward to discussing your thoughts as I am a bit fuzzy at present.
>
> Damn.
>
> He's known for the mouse, but that's least significant of his visions.
>
> RIP
>
It's the same thing with XEROX PARC, the place where Steve Jobs found the
mouse (and sometimes windows is mentioned), when in both cases the mouse
is less significant than the shift to what you could do with the mouse,
away from the keyboard.
A mouse really is pretty good for graphic stuff, certainly beats a
keyboard for that, nnd the house helped to make the rest possible.
DIdn't Doug Englebart experiment with trackballs too? EIther rejecting
them or seeing them as an alternative to the mouse? I finally got one of
those last year for 75cents at a garage sale, I haven't used it that much
for the simple reason that it has no scroll wheel, and in waiting to get a
cheap trackball, I've gotten used to having the scroll wheel. One of
these days I may take a cheap scroll mouse and add the scroll wheel to the
trackball.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #93792 is a reply to message #93772] |
Thu, 04 July 2013 18:27 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> writes:
> DIdn't Doug Englebart experiment with trackballs too? EIther
> rejecting them or seeing them as an alternative to the mouse? I
> finally got one of those last year for 75cents at a garage sale, I
> haven't used it that much for the simple reason that it has no scroll
> wheel, and in waiting to get a cheap trackball, I've gotten used to
> having the scroll wheel. One of these days I may take a cheap scroll
> mouse and add the scroll wheel to the trackball.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#57 Doug Engelbart
NLS (augment)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NLS_%28computer_system%29
with cord keyboard.
about that time, the human factors group had a cord keyboard for 3277
somewhat the shape of large mouse with depressions for each finger and
rocker switch at the finger tips. claims of 2-3 times typing speed of
standard 3277 qwerty keyboard (with one hand) ... would allow one handed
keyboard with other hand on (real) mouse
other reference "five-key keyset" on left and 3-button moust on right
http://www.dougengelbart.org/firsts/mouse.html
past posts mentioning engelbart, augment, and/or cord keyboard
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#22 No more innovation? Get serious
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#26 Who Owns the HyperLink?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#31 stupid user stories
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#4 markup vs wysiwyg (was: Re: learning how to use a computer)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#48 XML, AI, Cyc, psych, and literature
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#55 creat
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#47 creat
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#12 Flat Query
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006n.html#50 stacks: sorting
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006n.html#51 stacks: sorting
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006p.html#54 Douglas Engelbart's HyperScope 1.0 Launched
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006v.html#22 vmshare
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007k.html#29 Even worse than UNIX
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008b.html#53 folklore indeed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008g.html#23 Doug Engelbart's "Mother of All Demos"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008r.html#57 PC premiered 40 years ago to awed crowd
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008r.html#62 PC premiered 40 years ago to awed crowd
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008s.html#3 New machine code
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009.html#61 Does IBM host guest speakers?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009f.html#28 Opinion: The top 10 operating system stinkers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009j.html#8 Fathers of Technology: 10 Unsung Heroes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#84 Adventure - Or Colossal Cave Adventure
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010g.html#9 Far and near pointers on the 80286 and later
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010g.html#53 Far and near pointers on the 80286 and later
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010q.html#63 VMSHARE Archives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#11 Typewriter vs. Computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011b.html#31 Colossal Cave Adventure in PL/I
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011c.html#2 Other early NSFNET backbone
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#39 Just a quick link to a video by the National Research Council of Canada made in 1971 on computer technology for filmmaking
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#40 GNOSIS & KeyKOS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013c.html#80 Still not convinced about the superiority of mainframe security vs distributed?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013d.html#55 Arthur C. Clarke Predicts the Internet, 1974
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013d.html#60 Arthur C. Clarke Predicts the Internet, 1974
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #93925 is a reply to message #93900] |
Fri, 05 July 2013 15:19 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in
message news:51d6a1c4$7$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net...
> In <alpine.LNX.2.02.1307041455320.27416@darkstar.example.org>, on
> 07/04/2013
> at 02:58 PM, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> said:
>
>> A mouse really is pretty good for graphic stuff, certainly beats a
>> keyboard for that,
>
> The competition to the mouse was not the keyboard, it was other
> pointing devices. I'll stick to my trackball, TYVM.
>
> "Real programmers don't eat mice."
>
The plural of "mouse" for a computer mouse can also be "mouses".
From the Merriam-Webster online dictionary:
4 plural also mous·es : a small mobile manual device that controls movement
of the cursor and selection of functions on a computer display
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94000 is a reply to message #93602] |
Thu, 04 July 2013 19:25 |
Uncle Steve
Messages: 127
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
> NYT obit .....
> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/technology/douglas-c-engel bart-inventor-of-the-computer-mouse-dies-at-88.html
Honorable mention tonight on the CBC "As it happens" program. They
played an excerpt from his 1968 "mother of all demos" conference
address where he described the "mouse".
Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money
from the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary
pioneer. Such is progress.
Regards,
Uncle Steve
--
"Suddenly he put his hand on her cheek. The cock's spur rested
lightly on her lower lip. ``You and I,'' the Butcher said. He moved
his face close to hers. ``Nobody else is here. Just you and I. But
which is which?''" Samuel R. Delaney, "Babel 17"
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94490 is a reply to message #93900] |
Tue, 09 July 2013 13:31 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Friday, July 5, 2013 6:36:52 AM UTC-4, Seymour J. Shmuel Metz wrote:
> The competition to the mouse was not the keyboard, it was other pointing devices.
In 1971 we were programming applications that used a light pen on a Philco computer. IIRC, the light pen was just used to select a menu item--something that could be just as easily done by tabbing the cursor to the desired box.
Funky things would happen if we took a light pen and touch it to the screen of an adjacent terminal. (The terminals were converted television sets, and could still work as a TV set. We didn't have screen savers back then and the sign-on text letters were burned into the screen.)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94491 is a reply to message #94000] |
Tue, 09 July 2013 13:37 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of time. (see BSTJ index below:)
http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner phone service was a prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94561 is a reply to message #94491] |
Tue, 09 July 2013 14:56 |
Rich Alderson
Messages: 489
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from the
>> invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept was
> a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of time. (see
> BSTJ index below:)
> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was developed
> earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner phone service was a prototype of
> seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
Doug Ring and Rae Young, _Mobile Telephony: Wide-Area Coverage_, Bell Labs,
1947. (cited from Gertner, _The Idea Factory_, Penguin Books, 2012)
--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
the russet leaves of an autumn oak/inspire once again the failed poet/
to take up his pen/and essay to place his meagre words upon the page...
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94588 is a reply to message #94491] |
Tue, 09 July 2013 21:07 |
Uncle Steve
Messages: 127
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:37:57AM -0700, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>
>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
>
> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of time. (see BSTJ index below:)
> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner phone service was a prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
I recollecting an interview I heard on radio, and it may be that I'll
have to dig a little to find out which one.
Regards,
Uncle Steve
--
"Suddenly he put his hand on her cheek. The cock's spur rested
lightly on her lower lip. ``You and I,'' the Butcher said. He moved
his face close to hers. ``Nobody else is here. Just you and I. But
which is which?''" Samuel R. Delaney, "Babel 17"
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94608 is a reply to message #94491] |
Wed, 10 July 2013 00:01 |
brad
Messages: 191
Registered: February 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>
>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from
>> the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
>
> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept
> was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of
> time. (see BSTJ index below:)
> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was
> developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner >phone service was a
> prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
There is a documentary on cable TV that, if you aren't listening too
closely, sounds like Motorola was big in this This is a direct paste from a
Motorola site on the web;
"We introduced the world's first commercial portable cellular phone"
I think of Motorola back in the days when they would fill half the trunk of
your car with gear and provide telephone-like service. I suspect that, like
most inventions, you really have to dig to get at the truth. The "pure"
cases are rare; the airplane and xerography are pretty darn pure and come to
mind as exceptions to the general rule.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94625 is a reply to message #94608] |
Wed, 10 July 2013 02:25 |
Rob Doyle
Messages: 62
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On 7/9/2013 9:01 PM, brad wrote:
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>>
>>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any
>>> money from the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a
>>> visionary pioneer.
>>
>> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole
>> concept was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive
>> period of time. (see BSTJ index below:)
>> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
>>
>>
>> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was
>> developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner >phone service
>> was a prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station
>> to another.
>
> There is a documentary on cable TV that, if you aren't listening too
> closely, sounds like Motorola was big in this This is a direct paste
> from a Motorola site on the web;
>
> "We introduced the world's first commercial portable cellular phone"
>
> I think of Motorola back in the days when they would fill half the
> trunk of your car with gear and provide telephone-like service. I
> suspect that, like most inventions, you really have to dig to get at
> the truth. The "pure" cases are rare; the airplane and xerography
> are pretty darn pure and come to mind as exceptions to the general
> rule.
>
Motorola was certainly an early adopter. Harris and GE were also players.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Mobile_Phone_System
Rob.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94642 is a reply to message #94608] |
Wed, 10 July 2013 07:39 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/10/2013 12:01 AM, brad wrote:
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>>
>>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from
>>> the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
>>
>> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept
>> was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of
>> time. (see BSTJ index below:)
>> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
>> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was
>> developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner >phone service was a
>> prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
>
> There is a documentary on cable TV that, if you aren't listening too
> closely, sounds like Motorola was big in this This is a direct paste from a
> Motorola site on the web;
>
> "We introduced the world's first commercial portable cellular phone"
>
> I think of Motorola back in the days when they would fill half the trunk of
> your car with gear and provide telephone-like service.
I remember those days. Their target market was contractors, oil-field
repair, etc. where there was a lot of money involved and the user had to
be quite aways from a land line.
I suspect that, like
> most inventions, you really have to dig to get at the truth. The "pure"
> cases are rare; the airplane and xerography are pretty darn pure and come to
> mind as exceptions to the general rule.
>
The airplane not so much, apparently. The Wrights most likely weren't
first. That situation is probably similar to computers. Who was "the
inventor of the computer?" Not so sure about Xerography either.
Chester Carlson bought the invention.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart / cell phones [message #94689 is a reply to message #94608] |
Wed, 10 July 2013 10:03 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:01:23 AM UTC-4, brad wrote:
> There is a documentary on cable TV that, if you aren't listening too closely, sounds like Motorola was big in this This is a direct paste from a Motorola site on the web; "We introduced the world's first commercial portable cellular phone"
> I think of Motorola back in the days when they would fill half the trunk of your car with gear and provide telephone-like service. I suspect that, like most inventions, you really have to dig to get at the truth. The "pure" cases are rare; the airplane and xerography are pretty darn pure and come to mind as exceptions to the general rule.
You're correct. In this specific case, "pure" constitutes several intermediate steps.
The first development was mobile telephone service itself, which the Bell System introduced after WW II. That had only a few channels per city, so capacity was very limited. Originally it was manual, but in the 1960s one could dial direct in and out to/from mobile phones.
The second development was cellular service, which provided considerably more capacity via the use of small low-powered cells that could re-use frequencies. The original system (see above references) was intended for automobiles. It had a telephone set in the front of the car, plus a radio unit in the trunk. While limited to automobiles, this was a huge development and truly revolutionary as it allowed them to meet the large unsatisfied demand for mobile service. As the BSTJ articles show, this development involved quite a bit of research and testing.
The third development was the miniaturization of the above components. First out were "bag phones". While portable, these were cumbersome.
Subsequent to that were the "brick" phones, which were handheld devices. I suspect when people talk about "inventing the cell phone", they're actually referring to the brick phone. It would be more accurate to say that they invented the first miniature hand-held unit. I thought that was done by Motorola engineers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94811 is a reply to message #94642] |
Wed, 10 July 2013 22:14 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <krjgj1$bej$1@dont-email.me>,
Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> The airplane not so much, apparently. The Wrights most likely weren't
> first.
A lot of previous art, but the Wrights added a few key elements, just
like Watt built on Newcomb's steam engine which was apparently the
first widely used steam engine so he should probably get the credit.
> That situation is probably similar to computers. Who was "the
> inventor of the computer?" Not so sure about Xerography either.
> Chester Carlson bought the invention.
--
Gambling with Other People's Money is the meth of the fiscal industry.
me -- in the spirit of Karl and Groucho Marx
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94892 is a reply to message #94811] |
Thu, 11 July 2013 03:44 |
Nick Spalding
Messages: 165
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Walter Bushell wrote, in
<proto-D74660.22140610072013@70-1-84-166.pools.spcsdns.net>
on Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:14:06 -0400:
> In article <krjgj1$bej$1@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> The airplane not so much, apparently. The Wrights most likely weren't
>> first.
>
> A lot of previous art, but the Wrights added a few key elements, just
> like Watt built on Newcomb's steam engine which was apparently the
Newcomen
> first widely used steam engine so he should probably get the credit.
>
>
>> That situation is probably similar to computers. Who was "the
>> inventor of the computer?" Not so sure about Xerography either.
>> Chester Carlson bought the invention.
--
Nick Spalding
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #94935 is a reply to message #94811] |
Thu, 11 July 2013 08:46 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/10/2013 10:14 PM, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <krjgj1$bej$1@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> The airplane not so much, apparently. The Wrights most likely weren't
>> first.
>
> A lot of previous art, but the Wrights added a few key elements, just
> like Watt built on Newcomb's steam engine which was apparently the
> first widely used steam engine so he should probably get the credit.
>
>
>> That situation is probably similar to computers. Who was "the
>> inventor of the computer?" Not so sure about Xerography either.
>> Chester Carlson bought the invention.
>
I think the key development for powered flight was an engine that was
lightweight and powerful enough to get the plane off the ground.
Many people now thingk that Gustave Whitehead was the first to fly "1.5
miles at a height of 50 feet."
( http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/06/05/connecticut-senate -passes-bill-writing-wright-brothers-out-history/#ixzz2Yjx7m v3a)
It's interesting that when the Wrights donated their plane to the
Smithsonian apparently it was with the condition that the museum could
never publicly suggest that they weren't the first, so it was something
they were worried about at the time.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #95020 is a reply to message #94811] |
Thu, 11 July 2013 14:38 |
Alfred Falk
Messages: 195
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote in news:proto-D74660.22140610072013
@70-1-84-166.pools.spcsdns.net:
> In article <krjgj1$bej$1@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> The airplane not so much, apparently. The Wrights most likely weren't
>> first.
> A lot of previous art, but the Wrights added a few key elements, just
> like Watt built on Newcomb's steam engine which was apparently the
> first widely used steam engine so he should probably get the credit.
One of those key elements, I have read, was training. Most of their
predecessors assumed that flying would be easy - at least no harder than
basic sailing. Most of them had shortened lives. Part of their "kite"
experiments were to learn how to control them.
>> That situation is probably similar to computers. Who was "the
>> inventor of the computer?" Not so sure about Xerography either.
>> Chester Carlson bought the invention.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #95300 is a reply to message #94935] |
Fri, 12 July 2013 15:10 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:krm8ph$t4m$1@dont-email.me...
>
> [snip...] [snip...]
> [snip...]
>
> It's interesting that when the Wrights donated their plane to the
> Smithsonian apparently it was with the condition that the museum could
> never publicly suggest that they weren't the first, so it was something
> they were worried about at the time.
>
The Smithsonian maintained for many years that Langley was the first to have
a successfull powered aircraft. So the Wright brothers loaned the Kitty
Hawk Flyer to the British Museum. After Wilbur and Orville were both dead,
the plane was sold by the executors of Orville's estate... to the
Smithsonian for one dollar... with the written agreement with the following
stipulation:
"...the Smithsonian Institution or its successors shall publish or permit to
be displayed a statement or label in connection with or in respect of any
aircraft model or design of earlier date than the 1903 Wright Aeroplane,
claiming in effect that such aircraft was capable of carrying a man under
its own power in controlled flight."
If the Smithonian failed to honor this agreement, the ownership of the
aircraft would revert to the heirs of the Wright brothers.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #95348 is a reply to message #95300] |
Fri, 12 July 2013 16:13 |
D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 14:10:46 -0500, "Charles Richmond"
<numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> "Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:krm8ph$t4m$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>> [snip...] [snip...]
>> [snip...]
>>
>> It's interesting that when the Wrights donated their plane to the
>> Smithsonian apparently it was with the condition that the museum could
>> never publicly suggest that they weren't the first, so it was something
>> they were worried about at the time.
>>
>
> The Smithsonian maintained for many years that Langley was the first to have
> a successfull powered aircraft. So the Wright brothers loaned the Kitty
> Hawk Flyer to the British Museum. After Wilbur and Orville were both dead,
> the plane was sold by the executors of Orville's estate... to the
> Smithsonian for one dollar... with the written agreement with the following
> stipulation:
>
> "...the Smithsonian Institution or its successors shall publish or permit to
> be displayed a statement or label in connection with or in respect of any
> aircraft model or design of earlier date than the 1903 Wright Aeroplane,
> claiming in effect that such aircraft was capable of carrying a man under
> its own power in controlled flight."
>
> If the Smithonian failed to honor this agreement, the ownership of the
> aircraft would revert to the heirs of the Wright brothers.
Then it should be returned to them. And the facts promenetly displayed
in the Smithsonian as to why it is gone.
JimP.
--
Brushing aside the thorns so I can see the stars.
http://www.linuxgazette.net/ Linux Gazette
http://dice.drivein-jim.net/ my dice collection
http://poetry.drivein-jim.net/ Aug 26, 2009
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #95400 is a reply to message #94490] |
Fri, 12 July 2013 19:21 |
Lon
Messages: 395
Registered: June 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/9/2013 11:31 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 5, 2013 6:36:52 AM UTC-4, Seymour J. Shmuel Metz wrote:
>> The competition to the mouse was not the keyboard, it was other pointing devices.
>
> In 1971 we were programming applications that used a light pen on a Philco computer. IIRC, the light pen was just used to select a menu item--something that could be just as easily done by tabbing the cursor to the desired box.
>
> Funky things would happen if we took a light pen and touch it to the screen of an adjacent terminal. (The terminals were converted television sets, and could still work as a TV set. We didn't have screen savers back then and the sign-on text letters were burned into the screen.)
>
Were the light pens essentially just photocells, where the display
driver would put up a streak or other marker on the screen and the light
pen would detect that in the scan and the screen position was taken from
that?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #95401 is a reply to message #94491] |
Fri, 12 July 2013 19:21 |
Lon
Messages: 395
Registered: June 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/9/2013 11:37 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>
>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
>
> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of time. (see BSTJ index below:)
> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner phone service was a prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
>
It wasn't Hedley Lamar?
|
|
|
|
| Re: light pens, was Doug Englebart [message #95408 is a reply to message #95400] |
Fri, 12 July 2013 21:39 |
John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> Were the light pens essentially just photocells, where the display
> driver would put up a streak or other marker on the screen and the light
> pen would detect that in the scan and the screen position was taken from
> that?
The ones I used were. You'd put stuff in your display list to test
for a light pen hit after each object.
--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #96236 is a reply to message #95401] |
Mon, 15 July 2013 10:23 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> writes:
> On 7/9/2013 11:37 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>>
>>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
>>
>> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of time. (see BSTJ index below:)
>> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
>> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner phone service was a prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
>>
> It wasn't Hedley Lamar?
Only in Blazing Saddles...
scott
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #96289 is a reply to message #96236] |
Mon, 15 July 2013 13:24 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message
news:XBTEt.60484$0a4.12654@fx06.iad...
> Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> writes:
>> On 7/9/2013 11:37 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>>>
>>>> Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from
>>>> the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
>>>
>>> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole
>>> concept was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive
>>> period of time. (see BSTJ index below:)
>>> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
>>> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was
>>> developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner phone service was a
>>> prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to
>>> another.
>>>
>> It wasn't Hedley Lamar?
>
> Only in Blazing Saddles...
>
And ISTM the real Heddy Lamar *sued* the Blazing Saddles people over the use
of the name so close to hers.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #96292 is a reply to message #96289] |
Mon, 15 July 2013 13:38 |
Bill Leary
Messages: 147
Registered: September 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Charles Richmond" wrote in message news:ks1asi$1p8$1@dont-email.me...
> "Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message
> news:XBTEt.60484$0a4.12654@fx06.iad...
>>> It wasn't Hedley Lamar?
>>
>> Only in Blazing Saddles...
>>
>
> And ISTM the real Heddy Lamar *sued* the Blazing Saddles people over the
> use of the name so close to hers.
From the IMDb trivia list for Blazing Saddles:
"Hedy Lamarr sued Mel Brooks over the use of the name Hedley Lamarr and
settled out of court. Mel said he was flattered by this attention."
- Bill
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #96298 is a reply to message #96289] |
Mon, 15 July 2013 14:37 |
Michael Black
Messages: 2799
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Charles Richmond wrote:
> "Scott Lurndal" <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message
> news:XBTEt.60484$0a4.12654@fx06.iad...
>> Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> writes:
>>> On 7/9/2013 11:37 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 7:25:47 PM UTC-4, Uncle Steve wrote:
>>>> > On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 01:11:49PM -0700, Frank Pajerski wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Like the guy who invented the cell-phone, he didn't make any money from
>>>> > the invention of the mouse, but is credited as a visionary pioneer.
>>>>
>>>> Who was the guy who invented the cell phone? I thought the whole concept
>>>> was a collaborative effort from Bell Labs over an extensive period of
>>>> time. (see BSTJ index below:)
>>>> http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol58-1979/bstj-vol58-is sue01.html
>>>> While the above is from 1979, the concept of cellular handoff was
>>>> developed earlier; for instance, the 1969 Metroliner phone service was a
>>>> prototype of seamless automated handoff from one base station to another.
>>>>
>>> It wasn't Hedley Lamar?
>>
>> Only in Blazing Saddles...
>>
>
> And ISTM the real Heddy Lamar *sued* the Blazing Saddles people over the use
> of the name so close to hers.
>
She should have been glad of the attention. Her career was well in the
past by the time of Blazing Saddles. If anything, it moved her into more
prominence, she's a real person because of the film. You can't mention
Hedley without Hedy, or vice versa.
If she hadn't been parodied in the film, nobody would have known her,
except for the retroactive pointers to her patent on spread spectrum.
Now, it would seem some of her films are worth se4eing, being out of the
ordinary for the time, but we wouldn't be talking about her (and I
wouldn't mention her films here) if not for Blazing Saddles.
Michael
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #96305 is a reply to message #96298] |
Mon, 15 July 2013 15:41 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Michael Black" <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1307151429340.18087@darkstar.example.org...
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Charles Richmond wrote:
>
> [snip...] [snip...]
> [snip...]
>
>> And ISTM the real Heddy Lamar *sued* the Blazing Saddles people over the
>> use of the name so close to hers.
>>
> She should have been glad of the attention. Her career was well in the
> past by the time of Blazing Saddles. If anything, it moved her into more
> prominence, she's a real person because of the film. You can't mention
> Hedley without Hedy, or vice versa.
>
> If she hadn't been parodied in the film, nobody would have known her,
> except for the retroactive pointers to her patent on spread spectrum.
>
> Now, it would seem some of her films are worth se4eing, being out of the
> ordinary for the time, but we wouldn't be talking about her (and I
> wouldn't mention her films here) if not for Blazing Saddles.
>
Hedy Lamar is *no* dummy. I believe she had other patents besides frequency
hopping radio. For the bulk of folks, even with Blazing Saddles... I doubt
the average person on the street could identify her. She probably thought
the movie portrayed her in a bad light... or thought that they should have
*paid* her for the use of the name.
There is a movie with a young Hedy Lamar (about 24 I think) and Jimmy
Stewart titled "Come Live with Me". It's a nice movie, Hedy is very
beautiful in it, and you get to see Stewart using a typewriter. I *like*
old typewriters and I think Jimmy Stewart plays a novelist in this movie.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: copyright protection/Doug Englebart [message #96310 is a reply to message #96305] |
Mon, 15 July 2013 15:57 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, July 15, 2013 3:41:17 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
> She probably thought the movie portrayed her in a bad light... or thought that they should have *paid* her for the use of the name.
Copyright laws on that sort of thing are tricky. Apparently, they _can_ make brief use of a celebrity's name without payment for the purposes of humor (eg satire), it falls under protected free speech. TV shows "name drop" for humor all the time. I think they can even use it for humor in a negative or teasing way as long as it bears some resemblance to the truth (eg making a joke about wild partying and referring to Lindsay Lohan, as an example).
A few years ago there was a "House" episode where he parodied the closing scene from Casablanca in telling a young girl he couldn't be with her. "You belong with Victor--there's a kid in your class named Victor, isn't there?") Anyway, presumably that was a legal use of the Casablanca dialogue.
I believe when it comes to music the rules are much tougher. There was a popular pop song that sounded a bit like an earlier pop song and the courts ruled it was copyright infringement. I believe the rights for musical numbers in TV shows are handled separately and differently than the dialogue.
Returning to computers, I have no idea what rules apply when utilizing copyrighted source code in a program.
As to trademarks, often times a company will pay a TV show to display one of its products as a subtle plug. You see Apple computers often on TV shows.. Same with cans of Pepsi. Sometimes they go overboard, really flaunting the product placement instead of merely it being subtly in the background.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doug Englebart [message #96389 is a reply to message #96305] |
Mon, 15 July 2013 20:17 |
Lon
Messages: 395
Registered: June 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 7/15/2013 1:41 PM, Charles Richmond wrote:
> "Michael Black" <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in message
> news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1307151429340.18087@darkstar.example.org...
>> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Charles Richmond wrote:
>>
>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>>
>>> And ISTM the real Heddy Lamar *sued* the Blazing Saddles people over
>>> the use of the name so close to hers.
>>>
>> She should have been glad of the attention. Her career was well in
>> the past by the time of Blazing Saddles. If anything, it moved her
>> into more prominence, she's a real person because of the film. You
>> can't mention Hedley without Hedy, or vice versa.
>>
>> If she hadn't been parodied in the film, nobody would have known her,
>> except for the retroactive pointers to her patent on spread spectrum.
>>
>> Now, it would seem some of her films are worth se4eing, being out of
>> the ordinary for the time, but we wouldn't be talking about her (and I
>> wouldn't mention her films here) if not for Blazing Saddles.
>>
>
> Hedy Lamar is *no* dummy. I believe she had other patents besides
> frequency hopping radio. For the bulk of folks, even with Blazing
> Saddles... I doubt the average person on the street could identify her.
> She probably thought the movie portrayed her in a bad light... or
> thought that they should have *paid* her for the use of the name.
Possibly. Any long time user of Corel Draw would recognize her, as she
was the winning entry in a Corel Draw art contest, and therefore the
face on the product box a few years back.
...no idea if reimbursed for said imagery.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
