3 ms·
They were imagination amplifiers. The computer itself didn't do much so you had to fill in the gaps by imagining the things it wasn't doing - often guided by so
by TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
They were imagination amplifiers. The computer itself didn't do much so you had to fill in the gaps by imagining the things it wasn't doing - often guided by some exciting cover art on books and games packaging.
You could also expand your imagination by thinking of the things you might do if you worked hard at it, or if it was only slightly bigger/faster/better.
Modern computing is the opposite. It does so much it doesn't leave any gaps for your imagination to fill - the creative equivalent of a distracting wall of noise for you to consume.
- nickt 6y ago> imagination amplifiers Thank you for that, yes - that explains them perfectly. Probably explains why I've always felt more at home in the terminal.
- ddingus 6y agoGreat phrase! In my view, this is one of the appeals very low resolution graphics can bring to the table. Code does not have to do much, which helped the fun alone. See the blue ones? Yeah, collect those. Reds are baddies... Or, on a ZX81 or PET, it was just shapes. Still that was enough. Let the mind run wild!
- criddell 6y ago> They were imagination amplifiers. That's a phrase that's always intrigued me. I think Douglas Engelbart and Ted Nelson said something similar and Steve Jobs is famous for saying computers are bicycles for the mind. I've always wondered what exactly these people were thinking of when they said that. Maybe I'm just spoiled from having computers within reach for the past 40 years, but I wonder if the phrase still means anything. Do we all have mind bicycles now and so it's just the default state?