deandean1125 t1_iydytmt wrote
Reply to comment by ramriot in TIL The inventor of the television was a 15 year old farm boy who got the idea for scanning an image in rows from the back and forth motion of plowing a field. by chapstickninja
Baird made mechanical television, basically a spinning disc with holes in it that could produce an image.
Farnsworth made what we used to use until recently.
Both had the same idea, but went about it in different ways
Ashe_feet_97 t1_iydz73v wrote
And Baird was first.
deandean1125 t1_iydzfgw wrote
First, yes, but his system had severe limitations. One or two people could use it, but the Farnsworth system ultimately won out because it could be viewed by many more people
ramriot t1_iye5rs5 wrote
Then we need to remove Thomas Edison from so many inventions because his invention was not something that could be long term commercialised. For example his phonograph was a cylinder that could not be duplicated like the disc recording system derived at Bell's Volta Labs.
herbw t1_iyes6qg wrote
Sorry you can't logically nor empirically do that to Edison. He showed it was possible and so then created a market for those. AND then they were improved because the markets made more efficient methods possible.
So you'd deny him the electric light because we use fluorescent lights & light diodes today? And tungsten filaments?
Preposterous!! Reductio ad absurdum refutations.
ramriot t1_iyf05al wrote
Actually I'd deny Edison the electric light because he was never the first or even the 10th person to demonstrate the technology & he purchased several patents from others on his way to his "invention" . I will give him that he commercialised an integrated power distribution & lighting system (although it was DC).
Going back to the phonograph, that he perhaps was the first. I used that as a demonstration of the absurdity of calling Farnsworth the inventor of television when he clearly was not the 1st, given that his idea had more legs.
Ashe_feet_97 t1_iye15d5 wrote
The the wright brothers invented the plane but we don't really count that because it's not a good as a Boeing 747.
deandean1125 t1_iye5s0m wrote
I'm unsure how that equates. Airplanes today use the same control systems that the Wrights put together in 1903, the only differences are that you sit in a seat and that the elevator is in the back
Ashe_feet_97 t1_iye6w0q wrote
> I'm unsure how that equates.
Feel free to read over it again if you like.
french_snail t1_iyfdq1f wrote
No you should read again, you’re confusing invention with innovation.
herbw t1_iyesfin wrote
Exactly!!!
herbw t1_iyerhdt wrote
Actually, spinning discs cost lots more time and energy, wear and tear, than magnetically creating a faster raster system. And it could create an image which was not so much jumpin about and had faster speeds of scannin possible. It got rid of that old jumping about images found in older, moving motion pictures, too.
Because rasters were the best form, Baird was early but not a good solution. Being there with the Wright flying machine counts, but it wasn't the form Bleriot made, which was the modern propeller aircraft. Engine in front, rudder in back & flaps for turning. No need for wing warping turns, either.
Being first is good , but being efficient AND first is better. As the WRights adopted Bleriot's Aircraft structures by the 1920's.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments