[epayne]

Alan Kay posits that yes it does matter that PARC "invented the future" because there were and are very few researchers working with the opportunity mix necessary. They had five years of freedom from business concerns, tons of ambition, the right context, intelligence and inspiration. Kay claims that the extremely unique situation and persons at PARC and previously at ARPA are what gave rise to the inventions. I think he would agree with you that other people would have made similar discoveries and inventions, if only they too had the opportunity and necessary materials. From what I have heard Alan say in his speeches his perspective is that the opportunity simply does not exist today, at least not in the necessary configuration to do what PARC did.

Check out this video for a more detailed history recounted by Kay about PARC and what led up to it: http://vimeo.com/84523828

[trhway]

>there were and are very few researchers working with the opportunity mix necessary. They had five years of freedom from business concerns, tons of ambition, the right context, intelligence and inspiration.

A lot of Universities and research centers have the same. As most of them are, arguably, not a PARC may be these conditions aren't important? On the other side, we do have a lot of R&D coming out of Universities and research centers, so may be PARC isn't important?

i may sound like trolling, but i did listen live to Alan Kay once and honestly got more confused and got more questions as a result :)

[dropit_sphere]

University research is not free from business concerns either---the phrase "publish or perish" exists for a reason.