1 of 1
The iPad of 1935
Posted: 20 March 2012 06:36 PM   [ Ignore ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  8385
Joined  2005-04-17

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/paleofuture/2012/03/the-ipad-of-1935/

There’s no denying that devices like the iPad, Kindle and Nook have dramatically changed the way that many people consume media. Last year, online retailer Amazon announced that electronic book sales had surpassed print book sales for the first time in history.

The future of the book has quite a few failed predictions in its wake. From Thomas Edison’s belief that books of the future would be printed on leaves of nickel, to a 1959 prediction that the text of a book would be projected on the ceiling of your home, no one knew for sure what was in store for the printed word.

The April, 1935 issue of Everyday Science and Mechanics included this nifty invention which was to be the next logical step in the world of publishing. Basically a microfilm reader mounted on a large pole, the media device was supposed to let you sit back in your favorite chair while reading your latest tome of choice.

  It has proved possible to photograph books, and throw them on a screen for examination, as illustrated long ago in this magazine. At the left is a device for applying this for home use and instruction; it is practically automatic.

Additional text accompanying the illustration reads, “You can read a ‘book’ (which is a roll of miniature film), music, etc., at your ease.”

Though René Dagron was granted the first patent for microfilm in the year 1859, it was New York banker George Lewis McCarthy who developed the first practical use for microfilm in 1925, allowing him to make miniaturized copies of bank documents.

Eastman Kodak bought McCarthy’s invention in 1928 and the technology behind the miniaturization of text was adopted rapidly throughout the 1930s. In 1935 the New York Times began copying all of its editions onto microfilm.

Microfilm was a practical instrument for archiving printed material for a number of institutions in the 1930s, including Oglethorpe University, which was preparing the Crypt of Civilization. The Crypt was sealed in 1938 and is intended to be opened in the year 8113. The December, 1938 issue of Popular Science included an article on the preparations necessary for that enormous time capsule, including the use of miniaturized text not unlike the concept above.

 Signature 

SilentTone: hulitoons blog of just plain silliness?
UBUNTU’ in the Xhosa culture means: ‘I am because we are.)”  So, I AM because WE are

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 06:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  10733
Joined  2008-02-21

Interesying, if a bit bulky. (Reminds me of the ingenious solutions come up with by the dad in “Blast from The Past”.) cheese

 Signature 

“Always, I Do What Is Necessary” - Rissa Kerguelen
Go to my Blog. It’s lonely.

I Am Still The Black Swan Of Trespass On Alien Waters
To the believer no proof is required; to the skeptic no proof is sufficient.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 06:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2898
Joined  2005-06-15

Instead of the Apple Logo would it have had the Moonshine Bottle logo?

 Signature 

I’m not some ordinary moron.
I’m an Oxy-Moron!

Mental Giant: A very tall person who is more than slightly confused.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 March 2012 07:09 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6930
Joined  2005-10-21

Basically a microfilm/fiche viewer, and we all know how popular those are today!

Must say, I was expecting this to be some sort of modded-up iPad, in the ‘Dieselpunk’ style. For those unfamiliar, Dieselpunk covers the designs from about the 1920s to the 50s or so, with lots of brushed steel, pipes and an overall Art Deco feel. The movie ‘Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow’ is a perfect example.

 Signature 

1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If it does what it says, you should have no problem with this.
2: What proof will you accept that you are wrong? You ask us to change our mind, but we cannot change yours?
3: It is not our responsability to disprove your claims, but rather your responsability to prove them.
4. Personal testamonials are not proof.

What part of ‘meow’ don’t you understand?

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 1