Sorry to burst all your bubbles. Photoshop may not have these features, but any major CAD software since the 70's does. It was definitely groundbreaking for its time, but Photoshop is NOT CAD software, so stop comparing the two.
Awesome. Adobe implemented freaking Eraser Tool in Illustrator CS as far as I can remember. Maybe in some CS34 we will see something like Spiro in Inkscape. They resell Illustrator over and over again without any significant changes. Damn, people had brains back in the days.
2009 and AutoCad finally gets geometric constraints? Wow, talk about being before his time! I can hardly believe what I just saw. Heck, Inventor just got "sketch block" capability (though instances of it's native parts and sub-assemblies were par for the course). Parametrics in the early 60's. My mind is officially blown!
From the sixties? For real? I make computer games for a living and some of the programs I use seem to be only a few versions better than this. That's really intense.
I think the demo was in the late 60s or very early 70s. I know I saw a tape of it back in '73. I read Sutherland's thesis, which described a lot of Sketchpad's internals. The internal architecture was instance oriented. He called it "hens and chicks". If you changed the master, all the instances changed. The constraint balancing stuff used RMS minimization, so it was unstable, but it worked for a lot of physics. All told, it was much more shophisticated that a lot of stuff on the market today.
What possible motive could there be to fake something like this.
This was top-of-the-line technology back then. What we have today is a descendent of that. It has to come from somewhere. There has to be a start at some point.
oookay... das is schon ziemlich fortschrittlich xDDD das teil war ja auch nicht grad sehr billig: das kostete 1963 mehrere millionen!! und füllte 5 RÄUME!!
und DAS highlight: alle 2 monate musste man für 50000 bis 1 million bezahlen, damit die abgenutzen röhren im rechner ausgewechselt werden !!!! ziemlich teuer, aber trotzdem: COOL !
One more confirmation of the observation that one person spending a LONG time on one program produces a better result than a large team spending half that time.
It could do instances of symbols just like Flash! very impressive. Specially when he made the lines parallel with "one click". Neither Flash nor Illustrator can do that! :)
This program would have benefited from double buffering. On another note, I'm amazed this wasn't in high demand from architectural houses, design houses, etc.
1. Double buffering takes huge amounts of memory, which would have been unthinkable back then.
2. The display is actually drawing each line separately rather than putting pixels so double buffering doesn't apply. The limit is how fast the display can draw lines.
3. Computers were too expensive back then for anyone to think about using them for something so frivolous as architecture.
The amazing thing is, it looks like it's done with electronics, not with conventional hardware, processor, and software. Like, hardware registers and components replacing memory and programming. Input a coordinate, it gets stored as an analog value. To display on screen, the electron beam doesn't draw by pixels, it draws by lines. Now that's what I call a work of genius.
Hence, why I am dying to see the underlying hardware.
pure genius! just because it was beyond the standard academic judgment of the time, and not a commercial success, i'm guessing this guy never saw a penny for it...
Just insane to think that this technology was happening 50 years ago.
EquinoxParadox91 2 months ago
Sorry to burst all your bubbles. Photoshop may not have these features, but any major CAD software since the 70's does. It was definitely groundbreaking for its time, but Photoshop is NOT CAD software, so stop comparing the two.
discobob59841 4 months ago
Is this world's first touchscreen?
conspiritor2 5 months ago
Awesome. Adobe implemented freaking Eraser Tool in Illustrator CS as far as I can remember. Maybe in some CS34 we will see something like Spiro in Inkscape. They resell Illustrator over and over again without any significant changes. Damn, people had brains back in the days.
TMTKowalski 7 months ago
Google SketchUp in 1962!
HHGFHJGFHJGFJTYFJDGY 11 months ago
I wonder where humanity would be right now if we invested our technology into things like this instead of nukes or Agent Orange.
Sweenaba 1 year ago 7
Tell me this is a fake because my head its about to explode.
What a genius!
carlitoxxe 1 year ago 9
Wow this looks pretty close to AutoCAD only difference is that its almost better lol unbelievable.
briant2828 1 year ago 4
Saludos, Layla Hirsch
Artudytv 1 year ago
...OMG...This was 1963...can you imagine what might be in the works today???......
phetops 1 year ago
ehehehheehehe, autocad é uma verdadeira bosta mermo
magueza 2 years ago
thank you.
jabahpureza 2 years ago
Utter genius. A true visionary.
captainpanic08 2 years ago 3
2009 and AutoCad finally gets geometric constraints? Wow, talk about being before his time! I can hardly believe what I just saw. Heck, Inventor just got "sketch block" capability (though instances of it's native parts and sub-assemblies were par for the course). Parametrics in the early 60's. My mind is officially blown!
jdavis417 2 years ago 8
reminds me of autodesk inventor
NathanIzHere 2 years ago
"I didn't know it was hard" ...genius!! ...this puts everything we do with products like AutoCad etc these days, into perspective!
y16amp 2 years ago
O.o
shalvius 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Amazing. Just Amazing.
jancobblepot 2 years ago
1960ies? unbelievable.
joder1979 2 years ago
@joder1979
1963
zenek135 2 years ago
how DID he do it?
back then he had less proccesingpower than my calculator... Amazing
badillin 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
kookara 2 years ago
Comment removed
kookara 2 years ago
Amazing and humbling.
feedmepaper 2 years ago
jeez
DOUBLESH0CK 2 years ago
.... Amazing, such a complicated program, I didn't know they were that good back then.
MADJIHAD1942 2 years ago
thats awesome
ricksans 2 years ago
Wow, this is just like the sketch editor in SolidWorks.
I really miss those constraints, relations and smart dimensions in other vector drawing software.
iAmSquidThing 2 years ago 2
Awesome.
bummercucumber 2 years ago
From the sixties? For real? I make computer games for a living and some of the programs I use seem to be only a few versions better than this. That's really intense.
skonenblades 2 years ago 2
I think the demo was in the late 60s or very early 70s. I know I saw a tape of it back in '73. I read Sutherland's thesis, which described a lot of Sketchpad's internals. The internal architecture was instance oriented. He called it "hens and chicks". If you changed the master, all the instances changed. The constraint balancing stuff used RMS minimization, so it was unstable, but it worked for a lot of physics. All told, it was much more shophisticated that a lot of stuff on the market today.
kaleberg2 2 years ago 7
Elegant! Reminds me of early experimental animations!
greeneo 2 years ago
How the hell did the world ever get saddled with AutoCAD?
Shevek 2 years ago 6
We ended up with shit like autoCAD because of the simple rule:
Bad = cheap
Good = expensive
richardmaudsley77 2 years ago 4
Phenomenal. Of course, this was from the same decade smart people like this landed us on the moon. So, I guess I shouldn't be so surprised.
soapko 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Knowing a little something about electronics and computers, I'm really impressed. And still not sure if this is a fake or not.
kkrepp 2 years ago
What possible motive could there be to fake something like this.
This was top-of-the-line technology back then. What we have today is a descendent of that. It has to come from somewhere. There has to be a start at some point.
wowthungsten 2 years ago 2
how the hell he was ABLE to do that in 1963??
AnonymousOficial 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Illustrator suxxors
sdlabs 2 years ago
3D version was available in 1963.... blew my socks out.
kinmanyuen 2 years ago 2
oookay... das is schon ziemlich fortschrittlich xDDD das teil war ja auch nicht grad sehr billig: das kostete 1963 mehrere millionen!! und füllte 5 RÄUME!!
und DAS highlight: alle 2 monate musste man für 50000 bis 1 million bezahlen, damit die abgenutzen röhren im rechner ausgewechselt werden !!!! ziemlich teuer, aber trotzdem: COOL !
xXSaBiMaKeSpArTyXx 3 years ago
One more confirmation of the observation that one person spending a LONG time on one program produces a better result than a large team spending half that time.
EvgeniSergeev 3 years ago 6
I wonder if Solidworks 2009 is reverse compatible with Sketchpad 1963?
leigh8959 3 years ago
I can't believe something like this already existed in the 60's
Awesome
sliverboy 3 years ago 10
it also shows how few things progressed since then.
If I look at some modern programs, I even think, we lost many ways of approaching certain problems, made them more complicated than needed.
DarkZeroVenarius 3 years ago 5
Vector graphics - most impressive
olsmokey 3 years ago 5
AutoCAD are slower than this... awesome!
Kloot85 3 years ago 4
And we still can't have copy and paste on the iPhone.
asudiarto 3 years ago 14
LOL... im still laughing about that...
polo20000 3 years ago 2
Wow, vector-based graphics in the 60s!
It could do instances of symbols just like Flash! very impressive. Specially when he made the lines parallel with "one click". Neither Flash nor Illustrator can do that! :)
bigblubox 3 years ago 2
That's awesome. Better than any modern tools I've used.
mp3cdripper 3 years ago
Almost as good as photoshop! ;)
hm2k 3 years ago
This program would have benefited from double buffering. On another note, I'm amazed this wasn't in high demand from architectural houses, design houses, etc.
PremierSullivan 3 years ago
1. Double buffering takes huge amounts of memory, which would have been unthinkable back then.
2. The display is actually drawing each line separately rather than putting pixels so double buffering doesn't apply. The limit is how fast the display can draw lines.
3. Computers were too expensive back then for anyone to think about using them for something so frivolous as architecture.
InvertedZ 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ad. 1
Woot =.=* ?
Redaddict1 3 years ago
re #2, I didn't realize that but now that you point it out I can see it. Its very clever.
PremierSullivan 3 years ago
Unbelievable what he could do back then. Just imagine what he could have accomplished today.
sakipooh 3 years ago
holy crap..
opatia28 3 years ago
Solidworks 1963?
davabran 3 years ago
its one down from Solidworks 05.
reneg0d 3 years ago
incredible ... wow ....
watherelement 3 years ago
I wonder how little RAM and storage space this consumed compared to MS Paint.
jugalator 3 years ago 2
The amazing thing is, it looks like it's done with electronics, not with conventional hardware, processor, and software. Like, hardware registers and components replacing memory and programming. Input a coordinate, it gets stored as an analog value. To display on screen, the electron beam doesn't draw by pixels, it draws by lines. Now that's what I call a work of genius.
Hence, why I am dying to see the underlying hardware.
Volatus 3 years ago 7
No, this is running on a TX-2 computer
InvertedZ 3 years ago
Holy crap.. The CINTIQ WACOM was around in 1963! :O
RubberRoss 3 years ago
MS Paint on steroids
alternativemusiq1 3 years ago
My jaw just made a hole in the floor.
Incredible!
Codmate 3 years ago
pure genius! just because it was beyond the standard academic judgment of the time, and not a commercial success, i'm guessing this guy never saw a penny for it...
theRealCatinahat 3 years ago 8
I have absolutely got to see the physical hardware this was done on.
Stunning.
Volatus 3 years ago 30
This has been flagged as spam show
What a gay comment
ELkuken 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Don't you just want to have sex with it?
Bushmills21 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Maybe with it's daughter...Is she hot?
siempreflaco 3 years ago
@Volatus The physical hardware that was running Sketchpad:
ed-thelen*org/comp-hist/BRL61-0626*jpg
(replace asterisks with dots)
DevilMaster 1 year ago
@Volatus Search "BRL61-0626.jpg" on Google Images. Select the first image. That (all of it) is the physical hardware.
DevilMaster 7 months ago
That's messed up, Illustrator CS3 doesn't have half these features.
calaverius 3 years ago 47
@calaverius three years later and Photoshop CS5 still doesnt
MrLegendman3 3 months ago
truly impressive, indeed.
radornkeldam 4 years ago 3
wow. WAY ahead of its time and even today impressive piece of software & hardware.
A genius.
dacloo 4 years ago 7