ENIAC was very important but this article overstates its significance and ignores other (non US) machines to the point of historical inaccuracy. No mention of Z3 or Manchester Baby for example, the latter based on the von Neumann paper for example, was arguably a more accurate pointer towards how computer architecture would develop.

▲

BirAdam 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

ENIAC was far more important for the general computing industry than other machines of its time. ENIAC led to EMCC (the first computer company) and UNIVAC. It was UNIVAC and IBM struggling against one another that created the entire industry.

	▲	hedora 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		IBM built the Harvard Mark 1 in 1944, before EMCC existed.

▲

sebastos 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Wait, where are you thinking the von Neumann paper which came from?

	▲	klelatti 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The paper came out of work on ENIAC and was adapted to follow the approach in the paper but Baby was built from outset to use that approach and its design much more closely matches the architecture that has been used by almost all digital computers since. I don’t dispute that ENIAC is important but it’s role is more nuanced than this article implies.