URI: 
       [HN Gopher] Morris Tanenbaum, inventor of the silicon transistor...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Morris Tanenbaum, inventor of the silicon transistor, has died
        
       Author : furcyd
       Score  : 282 points
       Date   : 2023-05-12 18:32 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
  HTML web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
  TEXT w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | jchallis wrote:
       | It's incredibly humbling to think that his #2 and #3 life
       | achievements were building practical high field superconducting
       | magnets (making MRI machines possible a decade later) and being
       | CEO of AT&T.
        
       | woodruffw wrote:
       | It's incredibly humbling to be reminded how young this field of
       | our is: this site and everything its presence implies (about the
       | Internet, global communication, computers) would not exist were
       | it not for the work of a very-recently-deceased engineer.
       | 
       | Very few other fields (aerospace and modern pharmacology, among
       | them) can say the same thing.
        
         | cubefox wrote:
         | It is interesting to think about about alternative history
         | here: If microchip technology had never been invented for some
         | reason, what would we have developed instead? What is the next
         | best computing technology?
        
           | piersj225 wrote:
           | This is something the Russians worked on,
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_integrator
           | 
           | I've been told analogue computers got pretty far too,
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_computer
        
             | zdw wrote:
             | The Computer History Museum has a surprisingly large
             | exhibit on these if you ever get to visit:
             | 
             | https://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/analog-
             | computers/...
             | 
             | It's pretty fascinating, and a great example of working
             | within the limitations of hardware at the time.
        
           | sawyna wrote:
           | I don't think anyone has ever explored an alternative here.
           | Transistors came out of exploratory research that Bell Labs
           | funded and as the other comments say, this indeed happened
           | very recently! I suppose the silicon industry and the digital
           | age built up so fast that we didn't really have the incentive
           | to explore the alternative?
        
           | kens wrote:
           | Nowadays, people think of just vacuum tubes and then
           | transistors, but in the 1960s there were a lot of different
           | technologies being used. For example, superconducting
           | cryotrons, magnetic core logic, parametric-phase-locked-
           | oscillator logic, microwave logic, electroluminescent-
           | photoconductor logic, and tunnel diodes. If transistors
           | didn't pan out, there were lots of other technologies that
           | could have taken over. Magnetic core logic (not to be
           | confused with magnetic core storage) in particular was used
           | in several computers and seemed poised for success until
           | advances in transistors killed it off.
           | 
           | More: https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-vacuum-tubes-forgotten-
           | rival
        
           | petra wrote:
           | Possibilities:
           | 
           | Mems vacuum tubes.
           | 
           | Nano electromechanical relays:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanoelectromechanical_relay
        
           | woodruffw wrote:
           | I think we _would_ have ended up here anyways: to assume that
           | the silicon transistor would not have been invented without
           | Morris Tanenbaum is to succumb to the Great Man theory[1].
           | 
           | The reality is that Morris was a brilliant man whose life
           | intersected in the right place and time with the arc of
           | history; we should celebrate his life and contributions for
           | that, and not because we think that we'd be stuck in 1950
           | without them.
           | 
           | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | phkahler wrote:
             | Not sure but I think the question is more like "what if
             | physics didn't allow transistors?" rather than if one guy
             | didn't invent them. What's the next best thing, and how far
             | would we have pushed it?
        
               | hutzlibu wrote:
               | If transistors would not be possible, then lots of other
               | stuff would not exist, like solar panels or digital
               | cameras. Handy electricity conversion, etc.
               | 
               | I think alternativly we would have miniaturized vacuum
               | tubes much more, the ones that powered computers before
               | transistors (and made them huge)
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum-tube_computer
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | Vacuum tubes was the thing, I'd imagine there would be more
           | of that.
           | 
           | That, or mentats.
        
             | mdiesel wrote:
             | Mentats would be cool, but don't think it's possible until
             | after the butlerian revolution. Before then computers are
             | just easier
        
       | cubefox wrote:
       | I'm embarrassed to admit that this is the first time I hear of
       | him.
        
         | irrational wrote:
         | You are one of the lucky 10,000 today.
        
         | supernova87a wrote:
         | Agreed, odd that the name just is not in the same group of
         | people as Moore, Fairchild, Noyce, etc? This is the first I had
         | heard the name.
        
           | hutzlibu wrote:
           | Fame is never fair and balanced, it seems. I would think
           | there are lots of other engineers, who don't even have a
           | wikipedia article, who made important contributions as well.
        
           | rchiang wrote:
           | Even prior to those guys, Shockley, Bardeen, and Brattain
           | have the 1956 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work. Kilby
           | received the same in 2000 (Noyce passed away in 1990).
        
       | dakial1 wrote:
       | "Despite Tanenbaum's early work on silicon transistors, AT&T did
       | not support further research or advancement of the technology. At
       | the time, Bell Labs was the research arm of AT&T. Although Bell
       | Labs had "a significant technological lead in silicon transistor
       | technology, it stopped doing proper research in the field--partly
       | because it just wasn't immediately relevant to AT&T's business--
       | so silicon transistor technology, including the integrated
       | circuit, was done by Intel and Texas Instruments instead,"
       | Tanenbaum said in a 1999 oral history conducted by the IEEE
       | History Center."
       | 
       | Good call AT&T! /s
        
         | Turing_Machine wrote:
         | > so silicon transistor technology, including the integrated
         | circuit, was done by Intel and Texas Instruments instead
         | 
         | Right. Tanenbaum invented the silicon _transistor_ (which of
         | course was a major accomplishment -- definitely worthy of
         | honor), but what most people think of as a  "microchip" (i.e.,
         | an integrated circuit with multiple components on the same
         | piece of semiconductor) was invented almost simultaneously by
         | Jack Kilby at Texas Instruments and Robert Noyce (then at
         | Fairchild, later a cofounder of Intel).
        
         | allturtles wrote:
         | Here's another source that disagrees (BTL = Bell Telephone
         | Laboratories):
         | 
         | "In spite of its secondary role as a semiconductor supplier,
         | the course of semiconductor research was shaped by the
         | scientific and engineering achievements at BTL during the
         | 1950s. While most of the semiconductor industry concentrated on
         | manufacturing germanium transistors and diodes during this
         | decade, BTL spent most of its research dollars on silicon
         | devices... Of the ten major events instrumental in the demise
         | of germanium as the preeminent starting material, seven
         | originated at BTL while the other three were derived from BTL
         | research activities. "[0]
         | 
         | [0]: https://ethw.org/w/images/3/3a/Seidenberg%2C_1997.pdf
        
           | mlyle wrote:
           | That -agrees-. AT&T built a substantial lead in silicon
           | devices during the 1950s, like your source says.
           | 
           | TI and Fairchild pulled firmly ahead in the 1960s; Intel
           | became hugely relevant in the 70s and 80s. AT&T had mostly
           | abandoned silicon research by this time.
        
       | lordfrito wrote:
       | This is a bit late, article (and wikipedia) says he died on
       | February 26. [1]
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Tanenbaum
        
       | solar_warehouse wrote:
       | Morris Tanenbaum (American, physical chemist / transistor
       | researcher) [1], not to be confused with Andrew Tanenbaum
       | (American-Dutch, CS professor who was responsible for MINIX) [2].
       | Both had great significance in what we call "computers" today, in
       | their respective fields.
       | 
       | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Tanenbaum
       | 
       | [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_S._Tanenbaum
        
         | shever73 wrote:
         | Thanks for the clarification, I was wondering if they were
         | related.
        
         | jakjak123 wrote:
         | Hah, I read many books by Andrew Tanenbaum. I remember him
         | putting in dry comments like 'It is not known whether CPUs have
         | dreams during their deepest sleep states.'
        
           | kkarakk wrote:
           | i loved those comments, felt like a mentor talking to you
           | instead of a person passing on info
        
         | FeistySkink wrote:
         | Andrew Tanenbaum is in a no way Dutch. States as much in his
         | Wikipedia article. There are plenty of Dutch scientists,
         | including in CS, so no need to gekoloniseren another one.
        
           | marcodiego wrote:
           | Sorry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lamest_edit_wa
           | rs#Eth...
        
             | FeistySkink wrote:
             | You're right, this was unnecessary.
        
           | tgv wrote:
           | He's lived and worked in The Netherlands since over 35 years,
           | possibly 40.
        
             | FeistySkink wrote:
             | Does that make him Dutch?
        
               | 29athrowaway wrote:
               | "Tanenbaum! You SOB"
               | 
               |  _[handshake sound]_
        
               | tgv wrote:
               | It's 52 years: https://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/home/cv.pdf, but
               | he's still an American citizen. You be the judge, but
               | it's certainly not unfair to call him American-Dutch.
        
               | helloooooooo wrote:
               | Is calling any permanent resident who is not a citizen
               | Dutch reasonable?
        
               | 13of40 wrote:
               | If he was born there but lived in the US for 50 years,
               | would it be fair to call him a Dutch-American?
        
               | bee_rider wrote:
               | Why is everyone just responding with further rhetorical
               | questions in this thread? It is annoying.
        
         | rvz wrote:
         | Exactly. and deserves a black bar.
         | 
         | Can we please have a black bar for respect and recognising his
         | great contributions?
        
           | reasonabl_human wrote:
           | Black bar?
        
             | woodruffw wrote:
             | HN will sometimes render a black bar on the tops of pages
             | when a prominent person has died.
        
               | mjburgess wrote:
               | I always assumed that was a rendering error
        
               | woodruffw wrote:
               | That would require HN to be modified regularly enough to
               | induce rendering regressions :-)
        
       | joshxyz wrote:
       | rest in peace sir, wishing you well in your journey.
        
       | andyjohnson0 wrote:
       | The tree of technological and scientific developments that enable
       | almost all of us - on this site - to do what we do, narrows back
       | to just a few people and their work. It seems that this man was
       | one of them. Thank you Mr Tannenbaum.
       | 
       | Black bar.
        
       | MichaelZuo wrote:
       | It seems the headline is a bit editorialized with 'Microchip' as
       | he does not seem to have been involved with subsequent
       | developments of the integrated circuit, what microchips commonly
       | refer to.
       | 
       | Though, after checking, there apparently are no clear cut
       | 'inventors' of the integrated circuit, which strikes me as a bit
       | odd.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | The article seems to imply that "silicon transistor" would be
         | more precise than "microchip" so I've put that in the title
         | now, at least until someone explains how it's wrong.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-12 23:00 UTC)