Category talk:One-of-a-kind computers

This category was nominated for deletion on 17 January 2011. The result of the discussion was keep.

Category names and definitions

Individual computers isn't really an intuitive name. I'd personally suggest calling this category Famous Computers. Oberiko 18:38, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Oh, good idea. I thought that if it was called "Computers" people might start putting *kinds* of computers in, but "famous computers" is pretty clear. Marnanel 18:43, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

OTOH, it's not letting me move the page. Marnanel 18:44, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

What is this category meant to represent? Someone has put VAX in it, but the VAX wasn't "individual," and was no more "famous" than any other computer model. — Kate | Talk 08:32, 2004 Aug 20 (UTC)

Yes, I was the person who put in VAX. What's the exact meaning of this category? Originally, I thought it meant "computers famous enough to have their own wikipedia article", which I would definitely include the VAX. But thinking about it some more, this category might mean "Computers whose production volume was exactly one and only one". So please clarify. Dyl 21:07, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it means the latter now, but it also really needs a new name - it took me a while to work that out. Unfortunately I can't think of one right now... — Kate | Talk 21:19, 2004 Aug 20 (UTC)

I originally created it, and did mean the latter. The name's not the best possible, just the best I could think of... Marnanel 23:15, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I also was confused by the term "individual computers". I added UNIVAC and BINAC before I realized what the category was supposed to be. I removed them. There were more than 1 BINAC right (like 40 or 70?). I suggest the name "Unique computers". --Bubba73 02:30, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, BINAC was unique, and I restored the category. --Bubba73 03:17, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The could be called Pioneering computers, except that some of the one-of-a-kind computers listed in the category are recent instead of pioneering. --Bubba73 04:48, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For the continuation of this thread, please see the discussion on the Early computers talk page. Thank you. --Bubba73 00:36, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

IBM ASCI White/Blue/etc

Why's it IBM ASCI White and not SGI ASCI Blue Mountain? I'd favour renaming it to just ASCI White and just have IBM acknowledged as the manufacturer on the page, like all the other ASCI computers. MatthewWilcox 13:57, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I created most of the other ASCI articles (without the vendor's name). I don't know why the creator of that article used IBM in the name. Since it's owned by the national lab and not a product where you can get another copy, I'd prefer the name without the vendor as well. Dyl 16:05, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

SEAC

What is the correct name of SEAC - Standards Eastern/Electronic Automatic Computer? I've seen both (probably more Electronic than Eastern), but I tend to think that Eastern is correct (due to SWAC). If so, I think the page needs to be moved. --Bubba73 03:19, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Correct MANIAC name?

What is the correct MANIAC name? (I've seen both)

Mathematical Analyzer, Numerical Integrator, and Computer or Mathematical Analyzer, Numerator, Integrator, and Computer --Bubba73 03:24, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]