4004 and IC history / was Re: Vintage computer photogallery

[Chuck Guzis]

On 12 Oct 2007 at 23:02, Brent Hilpert wrote:

> I quite agree about the 4004. It may have been first, but it was one of those
> things whose time had come - it really wasn't that big a conceptual leap. Some
> time ago I ran across an editorial in a magazine ca. 1969 that basically
> summed up the problem: increasing logic density and hence IC complexity (LSI
> was on the horizon) would result in an explosion of chip designs that would be
> unmanageable (unique design per task,low production runs,etc.). 


Check old Datamation and Computerweek issues; I used to read those 
religiously and that may be where I saw it.  Could also have been in 
an IEEE publication.

That was the definitely the buzz in 1969-70; I remember commenting to 
an EE prof at a local university that the single-chip monolithic CPU 
was just on the horizon.  His reaction was one who was being told 
that blue M&Ms were just on the horizon.  He just didn't get it.

When I left CDC for the grand world of microprocessors, Neil Lincoln 
(the architect of the not-yet-envisioned ETA-10) had me flown to 
Arden Hills to talk some sense into me.  After spending most of a day 
tagging around with him being shown the great projects on the drawing 
board, he sat down and said: "So you're leaving supercomputers for 
MICROCOMPUTERS?  Really?"  I told him that I'd seen the future and he 
confessed that he'd just bought a Commodore Pet.  I told him that I'd 
had an MITS Altair since 1975.

Cheers,
Chuck