If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 21:13:21 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Is an abacus also a computer? How about the comptometer? Actually, both are calculators. To turn them into computers their calculating function should be programable, and automatic. Neither one has the ability to do that, so they remain calculators, not computers. Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. My understanding is that conditional branching was one of the key defining traits. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 21:13:21 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Is an abacus also a computer? How about the comptometer? Actually, both are calculators. To turn them into computers their calculating function should be programable, and automatic. Neither one has the ability to do that, so they remain calculators, not computers. Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 09:33:51 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. Yep. And this time it matters. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. Yep. And this time it matters. no it definitely doesn't, particularly this time. at what point does a subroutine become a program? some functions on the more advanced calculators are very sophisticated programs, invoked with a tap of a button, and on some calculators, can be assigned to a button of the user's choosing. for programmable calculators, the functions are without any question *not* subroutines, but full fledged programs, and may internally have subroutines within them. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 19:59:39 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. Yep. And this time it matters. no it definitely doesn't, particularly this time. at what point does a subroutine become a program? When it can run on its own. some functions on the more advanced calculators are very sophisticated programs, invoked with a tap of a button, and on some calculators, can be assigned to a button of the user's choosing. for programmable calculators, the functions are without any question *not* subroutines, but full fledged programs, and may internally have subroutines within them. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. Yep. And this time it matters. no it definitely doesn't, particularly this time. at what point does a subroutine become a program? When it can run on its own. no program can run on its own. programs need an operating system, which does happen to run on its own, therefore by your definition, the os must be a program, with everything else nothing but a bunch of subroutines. in other words, your definition is wrong. some functions on the more advanced calculators are very sophisticated programs, invoked with a tap of a button, and on some calculators, can be assigned to a button of the user's choosing. for programmable calculators, the functions are without any question *not* subroutines, but full fledged programs, and may internally have subroutines within them. i see you ignored this part. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
On Thu, 07 Jun 2018 00:03:53 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. Yep. And this time it matters. no it definitely doesn't, particularly this time. at what point does a subroutine become a program? When it can run on its own. no program can run on its own. Playing the village idiot again? Insisting on exact literal interpretations just for this thread and just for the sake of argument? programs need an operating system, which does happen to run on its own, therefore by your definition, the os must be a program, with everything else nothing but a bunch of subroutines. in other words, your definition is wrong. You should start with the boot loader, or maybe go back to the BIOS some functions on the more advanced calculators are very sophisticated programs, invoked with a tap of a button, and on some calculators, can be assigned to a button of the user's choosing. for programmable calculators, the functions are without any question *not* subroutines, but full fledged programs, and may internally have subroutines within them. i see you ignored this part. The functions in a programmable calculator can be called on from the keyboard and used as required. If you can write a program that calls on them and links them then the machine is computer and the functions are subroutines. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. Yep. And this time it matters. no it definitely doesn't, particularly this time. at what point does a subroutine become a program? When it can run on its own. no program can run on its own. Playing the village idiot again? Insisting on exact literal interpretations just for this thread and just for the sake of argument? that's *your* strategy. programs need an operating system, which does happen to run on its own, therefore by your definition, the os must be a program, with everything else nothing but a bunch of subroutines. in other words, your definition is wrong. You should start with the boot loader, or maybe go back to the BIOS you're moving the goalposts, again. modern computers don't have a bios and calculators don't have either one, but for computers that did, they are for loading the operating system, not for running programs. some functions on the more advanced calculators are very sophisticated programs, invoked with a tap of a button, and on some calculators, can be assigned to a button of the user's choosing. for programmable calculators, the functions are without any question *not* subroutines, but full fledged programs, and may internally have subroutines within them. i see you ignored this part. The functions in a programmable calculator can be called on from the keyboard and used as required. If you can write a program that calls on them and links them then the machine is computer and the functions are subroutines. nope. calculator programs have subroutines *within* them. calculator programs can also run other programs. calculator programs can also be assigned to physical buttons as well as loaded and saved on magnetic cards or other storage. some of the functions assigned to buttons from the factory are very sophisticated programs. hewlett-packard calls them programs, as does the hp user base. they're called 'programmable calculators', not 'subroutineable calculators'. calculator programs are in every way, programs. are you going to claim that inserting a magnetic card or a module adds subroutines and not programs? yet another one of your pointless semantic arguments. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop installation error
On Sat, 09 Jun 2018 17:23:22 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Both are programmable, but not necessarily by the user. If they were not programmable, they would not calculate. The criteron is whether or not they employ a stored program, and they do not. ones which the user can add/delete. the calculator's built in programs, such as financial calculations, does not mean a financial calculator is a computer. it's just an advanced calculator. however, as i said, the line gets fuzzy with programmable calculators, which can store user created programs, but are not what someone would consider a computer. They are not really stored programs: they are stored subroutines which can be called on as desired. semantics, again. Yep. And this time it matters. no it definitely doesn't, particularly this time. at what point does a subroutine become a program? When it can run on its own. no program can run on its own. Playing the village idiot again? Insisting on exact literal interpretations just for this thread and just for the sake of argument? that's *your* strategy. I try to write what I mean. It's difficult to deal with someone who writes in general terms and then in the course of an argument settles on a specific meaning from within a range of broad possibilities. programs need an operating system, which does happen to run on its own, therefore by your definition, the os must be a program, with everything else nothing but a bunch of subroutines. in other words, your definition is wrong. You should start with the boot loader, or maybe go back to the BIOS you're moving the goalposts, again. Not at all. Not even operating systems can run on their own. modern computers don't have a bios ... Nor do some ancient ones. Toodle-oo to EUFI too and calculators don't have either one, but for computers that did, they are for loading the operating system, not for running programs. And programs are for running subroutines (and also functions). some functions on the more advanced calculators are very sophisticated programs, invoked with a tap of a button, and on some calculators, can be assigned to a button of the user's choosing. for programmable calculators, the functions are without any question *not* subroutines, but full fledged programs, and may internally have subroutines within them. i see you ignored this part. The functions in a programmable calculator can be called on from the keyboard and used as required. If you can write a program that calls on them and links them then the machine is computer and the functions are subroutines. nope. calculator programs have subroutines *within* them. Big programs have little programs designed to run inside 'em Little programs have lesser programs and so ad infinitum. calculator programs can also run other programs. See. calculator programs can also be assigned to physical buttons as well as loaded and saved on magnetic cards or other storage. Oh, I loved my HP41C. some of the functions assigned to buttons from the factory are very sophisticated programs. hewlett-packard calls them programs, as does the hp user base. they're called 'programmable calculators', not 'subroutineable calculators'. Subroutines are not programs? calculator programs are in every way, programs. are you going to claim that inserting a magnetic card or a module adds subroutines and not programs? Now you are being silly. yet another one of your pointless semantic arguments. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Photog steals images for an art installation | Eric Stevens | Digital Photography | 1 | December 12th 17 08:16 AM |
Canon PowerShot software installation | Robert Coe | Digital Photography | 1 | July 4th 08 04:03 PM |
Canon PowerShot software installation | tomcas | Digital Photography | 0 | July 4th 08 03:14 AM |
Camera RAW update installation (CS2) | Don Stauffer in Minnesota | Digital Photography | 2 | October 25th 07 12:45 AM |
PhotoShop Album ver. 1 and 2 Catalog Mismatch Error | Bruce | Digital Photography | 1 | November 11th 04 02:24 AM |