
Smart Toaster Can’t Hold a Candle to the Apollo Computer - Petiver
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/underappreciated-power-apollo-computer/594121/
======
koala_man
Suggested title: "The remarkable capabilities of the Apollo computer"

The computer history is very interesting, but the title is clickbait. It
acknowledges that the smart toaster is computationally far more capable, and
unconvincingly tries to justify the title by arguing that the moon landing is
more important than toast, which I doubt anyone's ever disputed.

~~~
jwilliams
Agree, but the issue is with the article, not the title (which is directly
from the source). The article even leaves off with:

> The lesson, maybe, is simple: If your phone is so much more powerful than
> the computers that put humanity on the moon, then why are you just staring
> at Instagram all day?

It's a pretty miserly take overall.

------
ronilan
Yes. Toaster is smart.

But toaster has no hands. No money to buy a candle. No access to Apollo
computer.

And the author somehow thinks it’s the toaster’s fault that it fails.

------
adfm
The Sunbeam Radiant Control Toaster predates both and seems worth mentioning
here for it’s superior user experience and unique analog technology.

Technology Connections produced a fantastic teardown video of it a while back.
[https://youtu.be/1OfxlSG6q5Y](https://youtu.be/1OfxlSG6q5Y)

------
planteen
Reminds me of the classic "EE versus CS" by Philip Greenspun:

[https://philip.greenspun.com/humor/eecs-difference-
explained](https://philip.greenspun.com/humor/eecs-difference-explained)

~~~
ghaff
Of course, if this were written today there would have to be a section on
displaying ads and otherwise monetizing the user's data.

------
TrentLarr
Everyone likes to point out how your smartphone, etc are more powerful than
the Apollo Computer. But, it's even more drastic than that.

The tiny processor that runs the bluetooth radio in your phone is more
powerful than the Apollo Computer.

The Cortex m0 used in many USB-C PD compliant wall chargers is more powerful
than the Apollo Computer.

~~~
DerekL
The Apollo Guidance Computer has roughly the same power as a Game Boy, first
manufactured in 1989.

~~~
TrentLarr
The game boy cpu was very underpowered for its time - which was fine, since it
was meant to get many hours off of AA batteries.

It's what you use it for that matters.

------
marcoseliziario
He could say the given the limitations on the hardware, that writing the
software was something that required a level of technical prowess hardly found
in your smartwatch. If we define brilliance as the ability to make every cycle
count, every memory location count. Then, I'd agree, that indeed it was an art
form. But given the same engineers, with the amount of processing power of a
budget scientific calculator today, they would achieve the same results, with
faster processing speed, more redundancy, an infinitely better user interface,
more safety and in less time with less people.

------
LiquidSky
>You could not actually guide a spaceship to the moon with a smart doorbell.

I wish some wealthy eccentric would fund this competition.

~~~
cgrealy
I'm reasonably sure that given access to the doorbells processor, you could,
in fact, guide a spaceship to the moon.

I mean, the killer advantage that the Apollo computer had in getting to the
moon was the giant rocket atop which it sat, but if you're talking
functionally (as in, correct outputs for a given set of inputs), I've no doubt
that pretty much any computing device could easily run the necessary software.

~~~
taeric
I'm more than a little curious what the retort to this is. Does anyone dispute
this view?

------
dr0verride
Its pretty amazing that these systems were using a form of virtual machines.

------
cryptonector
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRq_SAuQDec](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRq_SAuQDec)

------
lupire
My ranking:

1\. Apollo computer

2\. Smart toaster

3\. Contrarian writer producing nothing but complaints about people building
better lives.

