Talk:Foonly

Very Interesting
That would explain why this Dreamworks-owned SGI O2 machine I ran across got nick-named "Foonly"...very cute!

Comment moved from article page
-- moved to talk page by Chuq (talk) 11:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

-- moved to talk page by Jaysweet 19:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I was present in the computer room when Phil was debugging his assembler, and I can attest to the "foo foo foonly was a bastard" line from personal experience.

-- John Sauter (talk) 14:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Guys, the problem is that Wikipedia is not a blog; everything on it has to be referenceable back to some kind of *external* source materials. Otherwise, one of these days, someone is going to come along and edit the quoted text, with one of the following effects:


 * Crucial primary-source information about an important part of computing history will be buried in the article history and probably lost forever, just because someone thought the article would flow better if a certain quote was trimmed down or split into separate sections.
 * Errors could be introduced into the quote, and we'll have no way to find the errors and correct them.

Faced with these possibilities, the only alternatives are to not edit the article much and hope that Wikipedia vandals are equally considerate, or to delete the quotes from it as "unverifiable", and neither alternative is acceptable.

So, you know, write an email to a mailing list, or post something on a blog, or if you like I'll interview you by email myself and post the results on kragen-tol or something, and then we can reference the article to *that*. Please?

Wikipedia of course prefers citing secondary sources over primary sources (so that historians can make judgments like "Phil Petit's account seems more reliable than whoever put that crap in the Jargon File, because we've cross-checked it with interviews with the KL-10 team manager") but primary sources will do in a pinch.

Kragen Javier Sitaker (talk) 03:22, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Foonly is a very difficult subject to document with anything other than firsthand reports (aka "primary sources"). Most of the companies that used Foonly computers either no longer exist, such as Tymshare or Symbolics, or in the case of SRI, the folks who administered them are no longer there. I worked for a small company that had one F3 that I administered in the early 80s and could tell you stories for hours, but I haven't bothered because I don't have formal references to back them up.

Figmo (talk) 00:05, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Foonly's acquirement
What does this mean? Needs better wording, plus the information doesn't flow logically.Peter Flass (talk) 15:46, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Super Foonly vs F1
The article could make it more clear that Super Foonly and F1 were separate entities. The Super Foonly was an unfinished project around 1968-1971, and used TTL logic. Design of the F1 was started around 1978 and used ECL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larsbrinkhoff (talk • contribs) 06:37, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I made a big reorganization of the article, because Foonly is a company, Foonly F-1 is a computer. And this article is about the company :) --FlyAkwa (talk) 22:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Lot of comments moved from the article
I paste here lot of "personal anecdotes" and other "personal citations", because they can't stay "as is" in the article, without any citation or without encyclopedic content.

--FlyAkwa (talk) 23:49, 14 July 2018 (UTC)