Wrong, always wrong. Motorola demonstrated the first HANDHELD mobile phone. AT&T, Bell Labs were always major players in mobile, starting after WWII and evolving into cellular service. That first Motorola handheld in the 70s was not an actual cellular based phone at all, it did not use cells. It was AT&T, that supplied most of the cellular base station eqpt as actual cellular service later deployed in the USA. The first deployment was AMPS, developed at Bell Labs. And following the breakup of AT&T, the eqpt part of AT&T and Bell Labs became Lucent Technologies and they went on to dominate the cellular base station field. Today merged with Alcatel, they are still a significant player, probably larger than Motorola, though both of them have lost share to all the new players.
ROFL. Where did you come up with that? Sure, the moon program helped accelerate the pace of semiconductor technology, but it was never the only application. IBM, DG, DEC and others were building computers for commercial use, the military and commercial users were using semiconductors. Like all technology, it would have been a huge commercial success with or without the Apollo program, and with or without NASA.
I'd love to hear one that would justify the enormous cost, especially when we are already running massive deficits, running on borrowed money. Probably better to leave it to rich billionaires who claim they will be giving rides to rich folks.
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
You are a true idiot. IBM was using tubes and that was not going to cut it on the moon. Yes the transistor was being put to use, but you have no grasp of scale.
NASA and the military worked with Fairchild to make the very first integrated circuit chip, and other chips which were used on the Moon shot. Intel came out of those original scientists. Oh and that chip was not "commercially available" for many years, so your conclusion jump fails like all your other quick google glance and act like you know f*ck all methods. You know NOTHING about what went down then. Even a turbine impeller blade shape was top secret in 1960. You are an absolute dope.
And GPS is just the Apollo ranging system (which I described in another thread today), turned upside-down, with relativistic calculations to locate the birds, and triangulation to compute the position.
Wrong, always wrong. The first semiconductor based computers were in existence in 1953, both in the US and the UK. The UK not only hasn't been to the moon, they didn't even have a space program. Yet they had a solid state computer in 1953. IBM was using transistors, the iconic 360 line was introduced in 1964,
5 years before the moon landing and obviously IBM was working on the 360 for years before that. So was Sperry Rand:
formatting link
"The UNIVAC Solid State was a magnetic drum-based solid-state computer anno unced by Sperry Rand in December 1958 as a response to the IBM 650. It was one of the first computers to be (nearly) entirely solid-state, using 700 t ransistors, and 3000 magnetic amplifiers (FERRACTOR) for primary logic, and 20 vacuum tubes largely for power control. "
Noyce and Kilby had independently invented the first IC in 1959, that's before there was a space program.
That;s a big lie. Noyce who was a founder of Fairchild and Kilby at TI are credited with the invention of the IC. It's well documented and there is nothing in it about NASA and the military being involved. Obviously NASA could not have been involved because it did not even exist at the time . Wrong, always wrong.
and other chips which were used on the Moon
Intel did come out of Fairchild, when Gordon Moore and Noyce left to start it. But, so what? It's just like it is today, creative talented entrepreneurs leaving a company to start another. And that was AFTER we had landed on the moon. As for the
Oh and that chip
More BS. What chip is this? Intel's first chip was a static ram, fool and it was commercially available. The moon shot computers were built out of very basic gate technology ICs that were commercially available at the time.
so your conclusion
Wrong about computers, wrong about ICs, now the village idiot segues into impellers. Wrong, always wrong.
It's not the weight and size, but the poor lifetime. Those old-style batteries quickly degraded, leaving users with a bad experience... unreliable, unusable.
The military customers would have been pretty insistent on high reliability , even if there hadn't been a space program. Computer systems did demand hi gh reliability parts - they contain a lot of components - so they would ha ve been equally interested.
ything about satellite links - even low orbit satellites are too far away f or the customers to let the cell dimensions get small enough to be useful.
Labs
stem
uld
ver.
n't enough customers in place where the population density was too low to s upport a decent density of cell towers (partly because cell phones became p opular rather faster than the Iridium plan had anticipated).
IBM might have used tubes in their very first computer, but they moved to transistors early.
The first computer I used was an IBM 7040/44 in 1963, and while it didn't use any integrated circuits, it also didn't use any tubes - it was a discrete transistor based machine, like the PDP-8 which I also used around 1967.
Transistors had been around since Bell Labs invented them in 1948, but it took Fairchild's 1959 planar process to make them reliable and easy to use
formatting link
By the 1960's tubes were restricted to specialised high voltage and high power applications, and integrated circuits were starting to show up.
Sadly, the absolute dope here seems to be you. As a graduate student in Australia I bought a couple of integrated circuits - uA709 op amps - around 1967 so they were definitely commercially available.
The military were never the major customer. MIL-spec parts were good from 125C to -40C and very expensive. Industrial spec parts were good from +85C to -20C while the bulk of the production was commercial parts good from 70C to 0C.
I don't think that I have ever designed in anything but commercial parts.
Some of the ECL parts I have used came in ceramic packages and were industrial spec, but that was just because they ran hot, and commercial plastic packages wouldn't have lasted - we used them as a stopgap until Motorola started selling ECLinPS in volume.
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote in news:b7441221-ca6f-4855-9876- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
But NOT with IC chips. They were not around yet. The logic circuits were all discreet components. Not that you have enough brains or experience in the field to even know what the term means.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.