Comments on: Jane Smiley’s “Atanasoff” gets a rebuke in the New York Times http://the-eniac.com/2010/12/21/jane-smileys-atanasoff-gets-a-rebuke-in-the-new-york-times/ The First General-Purpose Electronic Computer Wed, 25 May 2011 01:23:42 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.2 By: David http://the-eniac.com/2010/12/21/jane-smileys-atanasoff-gets-a-rebuke-in-the-new-york-times/#comment-525 Wed, 25 May 2011 01:23:42 +0000 http://the-eniac.com/?p=79#comment-525 I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with your unsupported arguement that there is a “general scholarly consensus” in support of ENIAC. I’ve see that nowhere but from Penn locals and relatives of Mauchly/Eckert. What this book underscores which I think you find threatening, is the visits to Atanasoff after his invention of the first Electronic Digital Computer that Mauchly had, and the numerous letters begging for details about how it worked and how to use a binary system and memory.

Furthermore he lied under oath about these visits and letters, claiming he had never met the man, until the evidence was embarassingly brought to court. Court clearly showed him “borrowing” heavily from the overlying concepts.

I think the ENIAC is historically important to computer development, just as the CRAY or Apple II is. But it is undeniable fact (not “consensus”) that Atanasoff’s revolutionary ideas of how to use binary and memory are what created the invention of the electronic computer.

]]>