To be honest, I've always viewed computers as cold, unemotional, impersonal machines. I suppose they are, although the people behind them are not. The most surprising aspect of the video, to me, was its analyzation of the "nerds" who invented this wonderous machine. Though these people were, in a sense, societal outcasts who spent their time playing with unemotional, impersonal computer data, the inventors themselves relied much on their relations and interactions with other people. As the video mentioned, the founders of the first computer came together because they were friends, because "they liked each other." They "shared dope." They "shared beds." Most of all, they shared ideas. They were not driven by the commpetition, and the greed which motivated the rest of society. They succeeded through a "lust" after a common goal and the friendly relations to inspire each other. (Sara Rafferty)

What surprised me the most was the first computer. To me it seemed like just abox that flashed lights and did absolutely nothing useful. Furthermore the interest generated by this totally useless, crudely designed box in a few people brought about the computer revolution and the high powered machines that we use today. (Selanga Ranawaka)

I was definitely surprised by the way the documentation presented the development of computers and the fact that, in a way, the fascination with computers isn't much different from other kind of passions. Many of us hold the opinion of "hackers" as being lost in their own little world. Even though the documentation emphasized that fact quite a lot (life style, food, etc.), it also showed how a little hobby interest of ours can influence our lives. The founders were very persistent in the way they tried to find an expression of their passion. Surprisingly, they personally didn't seem to mind that great parts of their lifestyle had to suffer by doing so. Whether looking at the men of the 70s or at the boy of 10 years, they were proud to be the nerds, the fanatics, as we may say. (Agnes Flak)

Learning about the Homebrew Computer Club and its large contribution to the growth of the computer industry is what most interested me. It's intriguing to observe how the emergence of such a world-changing industry can be traced back to such informal gatherings of passionate individuals. The complete lack of big business's participation in the early stages of this industry is striking. It is surprising yet very telling that this revolution was the work of creative individuals rather than the innovation of corporate engineers. The power of cooperation and team-spirited creativity launched the industry, but competitive forces and business sense enabled it to grow into what it is today. (Kirsten Malm)

All popular revolutions start small. The computer age came from the bottom up; it developed itself with an almost "punk" ethic --one of sharing, working hard, following one's passion to extremes. The work of enthusiasts becomes the benefit of millions. The idea of personal computers was not the property of the industrial-military elite; it was not handed down from above. That surprises me --how democratic the process was. Where control exists, that is when "nerds" could not gain access to computers, that control was undercut by those that created their own computers. The idea of the personal computer is a populist concept. Hopefully, the populist concept remains pure to its roots, but, I have the feeling, we will find disillusionment and stagnancy at the end of the road that was once hopeful and changing. I think we'll see that in future segments. (John Melillo)

I guess the idea that I found most interesting was also what I found most surprising. The idea that new information on the development of computers, in the beginning, was shared for the benefit of all. The whole idea of the computer's rapid evolution being a product of 60s ideal is quite interesting, considering the fact that today I personally associate computers with the ideas of wealth and competitiveness. It is quite ironic that something that grew from a joint effort gave rise to monopolies and a very competitive industry. (Jaime Eaglin)

There have obviously been events in the history of civilization that have changed the lives of people dramatically; events that we refer as "revolution". The emergence of personal computers and applications is the revolution of our time with its idealism and passion behind it. Yet what is astonishing is that this revolution is in itself a summary of "idealism" and "greed". What has been planned by idealism has later on been driven extensively by greed. Are they inseparable? Dis the people, like the foundcer of VisiCalc, who did not follow up on their adventure, do the right thing or the wrong thing? (Ali Soydan)

What surprised me most was the fact that the first computer had virtually no use. The Stanford Computer Club was meeting because of their fascination with this machine... this piece of silicon which could provide a simple response to a question (2+2=4) by lighting up a light. THeir job was to justify this fascination: What was so neat about it? What could this be used for? Funny, those involved saw it as a toy and searched for playful uses --playing music, designing a video game. They did not think of the money or of the business uses. I guess this reflected the mood of the 70s. If the same machine and same club had been first initiated or invented today, I would expect someone to tune in more quickly to the fact that this could become a revolution in the business world and make money. The irony of this is that the computer is probably part of the reason our culture is more business oriented/money oriented today. (Ashley Hodgson)

I had never considered the connection of computers to their times before. Several people mentioned the great impact the open, sharing environment of the sixties had on the development of the personal computer. They said computers probably would not have (or at least not so quickly) come into being if people had not been willing to share their ideas, improvements, and inventions freely without necessarily expecting huge monetary rewards. One has to wonder whether the computer would have evolved differently in today's environment of limitless patents and hasty lawsuits. If the sixties were as ideal as these people say they were, it would seem so. One of the inventors of VisiCalc said back then, people were more concerned with improving the world than putting money in their pockets. I wonder how true this was, and how much things may have changed since then. I don't think young people have changed so very much as he implies. (Erin Fry)

What struck me most about the video, particularly during the first half, was the narrator's continuous return to the concepts of "nerds." He repeatedly painted the remarkable development of the computer and the ensuing revolution it spawned as a movement launched by a group of socially inept and unattractive youngsters. The nerd motif running through the video caused me to wonder why tehse individuals, whose desire to pioneer innovative creations and dedicate themselves to the study of arcane and complex disciplines, are considered freaks by mainstream society. Essentially, I began to wonder whether humans innately fear innovation and intelligence. Why is it that obvious displays of the aforementioned are viewed oftentimes in a negative light? Perhaps it is simply a fear of change, or a fear of the unfamiliar, that led society to alienate this group of techies. (Roshni Nirody)