Instructions For Computer Generated Presentations: Fill & Download for Free

Question:Following are the five generations of computers:Vacuum tubesTransistorsIntegrated circuitsMicroprocessorsArtificial intelligence (current)First Generation: Vacuum Tubes (1940-1956)The first computer systems used vacuum tubes for circuitry and magnetic drums for memory, and were humongous, taking up entire rooms. These computers were very expensive to operate and in addition to using a great deal of electricity, they generated a lot of heat.First generation computers relied on machine language, the lowest-level programming language understood by computers, to perform operations, and they could only solve one problem at a time. It would take operators days to set-up a new problem. Input was based on punched cards and paper tape, and output was displayed on printouts.The UNIVAC and ENIAC computers are examples of first-generation computing devices. The UNIVAC was the first commercial computer delivered to a business client, the U.S. Census Bureau in 1951.Second Generation: Transistors (1956-1963)Transistors replaced vacuum tubes in the second generation of computers.The transistor was far superior to the vacuum tube, allowing computers to become smaller, faster, cheaper, more energy-efficient and more reliable than vacuum tubes. But the transistor still generated a great deal of heat that subjected the computer to damage. Second-generation computers still relied on punched cards for input and printouts for output.Second-generation computers moved from binary machine language to assembly, languages, which allowed programmers to specify instructions in words. High-level programming languages were also being developed at this time, such as early versions of COBOL and FORTRAN. Also, they stored their instructions in their memory, which moved from a magnetic drum to magnetic core technology.The first computers of this generation were developed for the atomic energy industry.Third Generation: Integrated Circuits (1964-1971)The third generation of computers used integrated circuits. Transistors were miniaturized and placed on silicon chips, called semiconductors, which drastically increased the speed and efficiency of computers.Instead of punched cards and printouts, users interacted with third generation computers through keyboards and monitors and interfaced with an operating system, which allowed the device to run many different applications at one time with a central program that monitored the memory. Computers for the first time became accessible to the general public because they were smaller and cheaper than their predecessors.Fourth Generation: Microprocessors (1971-Present)The microprocessor brought the fourth generation of computers, as thousands of integrated circuits were built onto a single silicon chip. What in the first generation filled an entire room could now fit in the palm of the hand. The Intel 4004 chip, developed in 1971, located all the components of the computer—from the central processing unit and memory to input/output controls—on a single chip.In 1981 IBM introduced its first computer for the home user, and in 1984 Apple introduced the Macintosh. Microprocessors also moved out of the realm of desktop computers and into many areas of life as more and more everyday products began to use microprocessors.As these small computers became more powerful, they could be linked together to form networks, which eventually led to the development of the Internet. Fourth generation computers also saw the development of GUIs, the mouse and handheld devices.Fifth Generation: Artificial Intelligence (Present and Beyond)Fifth generation computers, based on artificial intelligence, are still in development, though there are some applications, such as voice recognition, that are being used today.Quantum computation and molecular and nanotechnology will radically change the face of computers in years to come. The goal of fifth-generation computing is to develop devices that respond to natural language input and are capable of learning and self-organization.

I’m not sure if your question means “longest opcode” or “longest program.”Let’s start with longest opcode, opening in the CISC camp:The Intel iAPX 432 processor has a bit-aligned, variable length opcode that is very flexible. According to Wikipedia, its opcodes range from 6 bits to 321 bits. 321 bits is just over 40 bytes (assuming 8-bit bytes).I don’t know the specifics of the encoding, or what instruction achieves that gargantuan 321-bit encoding. I’ll just quote Wikipedia here so you can get a sense:Instructions consist of an operator, consisting of a class and an opcode, and zero to three operand references. "The fields are organized to present information to the processor in the sequence required for decoding". More frequently used operators are encoded using fewer bits. The instruction begins with the 4 or 6 bit class field which indicates the number of operands, called the order of the instruction, and the length of each operand. This is optionally followed by a 0 to 4 bit format field which describes the operands (if there are no operands the format is not present). Then come zero to three operands, as described by the format. The instruction is terminated by the 0 to 5 bit opcode, if any (some classes contain only one instruction and therefore have no opcode). "The Format field permits the GDP to appear to the programmer as a zero-, one-, two-, or three-address architecture." The format field indicates that an operand is a data reference, or the top or next-to-top element of the operand stack.40+ bytes is a pretty long CISC instruction. I haven’t done a survey of CISC instruction sets, but I imagine this has to be near the top.And then there’s VLIW.VLIW stands for Very Long Instruction Word. In a VLIW machine, you have a long instruction word that’s divided up into multiple slots, and those slots bear some resemblance to RISC-like instructions. (RISC in this context means “small number of fixed opcode formats, with an emphasis on register-to-register instructions and explicit load/store.”)For a traditional fixed-length VLIW, the processor fetches the long instruction word, and shuttles each slot off to its respective unit. There are no opcode bits to specify the unit; rather, each unit’s slot is determined entirely positionally. The bits within the slot specify the desired operation for the corresponding functional unit.Companies such as Multiflow produced VLIWs with instruction words as long as 1024 bits. That’s a whopping 128 bytes for a VLIW instruction. Granted, that 1024-bit VLIW instruction specified 28 independent operations.It all depends on what you’re measuring.Now, what about longest assembly program?Are you only considering human-typed source code lines, or do you also include computer generated assembly code?Several years ago, I wrote a cache test generator (creatively named “CTG”) that used a solver to try to identify unique strings of stimulus to push a cache hierarchy through as many unique sequences of state transitions as possible.CTG ended up generating a library of nearly 15,000 unique stimulus strings. Those stimulus strings then got expanded to over a hundred million lines of assembly code. The resulting suite of tests ended up taking weeks to run on a cluster of machines simulating a chip design.CTG found an incredible number of bugs. Its suite of tests became a gating hurdle for new designs to clear before they could get sign-off. I didn’t write those gazillion lines of assembly code, but I generated them.Does that count?If generated assembly doesn’t count, then it comes down to what you consider a program boundary. Many applications up through the 1980s were coded in assembly. For example, WordPerfect was famously written in assembly language, as was much of Microsoft Windows (up through at least 3.x).I’m sure you could find plenty of high-lines-of-code assembly projects across many platforms up through the end of the 1980s. The question is, what boundaries do you use for counting? Are you interested in a single executable, or a single body of code that may have multiple executables that form a functioning whole?

I can generate a random number on my own.You might be thinking what am i saying, and that you have seen computers generate random numbers. Well i can explain this, but first see the importance of random numbers :Games : Say you are playing chess. It would be no fun if the computer moved same move every time. So if final rating of a couple of moves is same then the move is set to random so that we get different move every time.Validation & testing : Scientists and researchers use random theory to test a product. If a product is ready then testing it on a fixed input wont help, instead they set it to random testing. Because there might be some random condition which fails the product which was overlooked by the researcher.Cryptography : When experts use cryptography algorithms, they use random numbers as the key. Because random numbers have high entropy (entropy can be related to unpredictability) hackers have a hard time guessing the key.Now coming back to the answer, a machine cannot do a random thing. A program works on a set of defined instructions. So if instructions are static (fixed) then how its outcome can be different.For programmers:int a; printf("%d",a); will it generate a random number? NO. It will display the number previously stored in that memory block and its reference is deleted.Then how computers generate a random number ?Well i wont call it a “random number”, but a “pseudo-random number”. We have to provide our machine/program/software with a seed/seeding function. A seed can be anything from which a computer can generate a number. For example :If you ask me to write some code or some script which generates random number from 0–9, i will use current time as my seed. I will write my program to spit out one’s digit of second.user runs program at 18:35:02 -> output 2user runs program at 5:42:47 -> output 7And that user will think that my program is generating “true random numbers”.Instead of taking seconds (in time) as seed, we usually go down to milliseconds because there might be some instance where multiple threads start at the same time. If we take seconds, it will generate same value for all the threads at that particular second.User-11952704314340918353 thank you for the edit.