The mouse - There have been posts about human interaction. To me, the mouse was the gateway to human interaction. Without it, we'd still be typing and not clicking in dragging, even with our fingers. GUI - Complimented the mouse perfectly. I work in an environment where an as400 is the backend of one of our major apps. Yeah.. Interesting stuff but it just reminds me of the screens 'Bill Gates' is working in in the movie 'Pirates of Silicon Valley' even though that's not what it was. To me, 1 and 2 are the reason anybody, including grandpas and grandmas can use a computer. Excel / spreadsheets - Someone mentioned this before but it's work mentioning again. It's so user friendly and is a great entry point for non-technical users to try their hand at simple programming concepts when performing calculations on cells. Granted it came out before 1980, but the versions post 1980 are when the technology in spreadsheets evolved. Internet (of course) - Not sure how people wrote code without it! Don't flame me for repeating because this belongs on every list. INTELLISENSE - LOVE IT LOVE IT LOVE IT!!!!

标签，信息分类的方式。是的，就是每个问题下面的小方框。

令人惊讶的是，标签发明花了大约30年的时间。我们使用了目录和目录;我们使用了为印刷书籍优化的东西。

然而，30年比人们意识到印刷书籍可以用更小的格式的时间短得多。人们可以把书放在手里。

我认为核心CS玩家低估了标签概念。所有的研究都集中在自然语言处理(自顶向下的方法)。但是标签是第一种计算机和人类都能很好理解的语言。这是一种自底向上的方法，使计算机使用自然语言。

上世纪八十年代初，施乐帕洛阿尔托研究中心对计算机蠕虫进行了研究。

摘自John Shoch和Jon Hupp的“蠕虫”程序——分布式计算的早期经验”(ACM通讯，1982年3月，第25卷第3期，172-180页，1982年3月):

In The Shockwave Rider, J. Brunner developed the notion of an omnipotent "tapeworm" program running loose through a network of computers - an idea which may seem rather disturbing, but which is also quite beyond our current capabilities. The basic model, however, remains a very provocative one: a program or a computation that can move from machine to machine, harnessing resources as needed, and replicating itself when necessary. In a similar vein, we once described a computational model based upon the classic science-fiction film, The Blob: a program that started out running in one machine, but as its appetite for computing cycles grew, it could reach out, find unused machines, and grow to encompass those resources. In the middle of the night, such a program could mobilize hundreds of machines in one building; in the morning, as users reclaimed their machines, the "blob" would have to retreat in an orderly manner, gathering up the intermediate results of its computation. Holed up in one or two machines during the day, the program could emerge again later as resources became available, again expanding the computation. (This affinity for nighttime exploration led one researcher to describe these as "vampire programs.")

引用艾伦·凯的话:“预测未来最好的方法就是创造未来。”

我还会推荐3D鼠标。从20世纪90年代初开始就有几种变体。对于任何使用3D的人来说，像spacenavator这样的东西让生活变得更容易。(免责声明:我与3Dconnexion没有任何关系，只是一个满意的无rsi用户。)

回答“为什么新思想会消亡”和“如何应对”这两个问题?

I suspect a lot of the lack of progress is due to the massive influx of capital and entrenched wealth in the industry. Sounds counterintuitive, but I think it's become conventional wisdom that any new idea gets one shot; if it doesn't make it at the first try, it can't come back. It gets bought by someone with entrenched interests, or just FAILs, and the energy is gone. A couple examples are tablet computers, and integrated office software. The Newton and several others had real potential, but ended up (through competitive attrition and bad judgment) squandering their birthrights, killing whole categories. (I was especially fond of Ashton Tate's Framework; but I'm still stuck with Word and Excel).

怎么办呢?首先想到的是Wm。莎士比亚的建议:“让我们杀了所有的律师。”但恐怕他们现在装备太精良了。实际上，我认为最好的选择是找到某种开源计划。它们似乎比其他选择更好地保持可访问性和增量改进。但是这个行业已经变得足够大了，所以某种有机的合作机制是必要的。

I also think that there's a dynamic that says that the entrenched interests (especially platforms) require a substantial amount of change - churn - to justify continuing revenue streams; and this absorbs a lot of creative energy that could have been spent in better ways. Look how much time we spend treading water with the newest iteration from Microsoft or Sun or Linux or Firefox, making changes to systems that for the most part work fine already. It's not because they are evil, it's just built into the industry. There's no such thing as Stable Equilibrium; all the feedback mechanisms are positive, favoring change over stability. (Did you ever see a feature withdrawn, or a change retracted?)

关于SO的另一个讨论线索是臭鼬工厂综合症(参考:Geoffrey Moore):在大型组织中，真正的创新几乎总是(90%以上)出现在自发出现的未经授权的项目中，这些项目完全由个人或小团队的主动性推动(通常会受到正式的管理等级的反对)。所以:质疑权威，反抗体制。

我相信单元测试、TDD和持续集成是1980年之后的重大发明。