Scott McCartney has written an excellent counterbalance to the current literature on the invention of the computer. It is a fine contrast to Herman Goldstine's book on the subject. Here, we see a johnny-come-lately view of the great mathematician John von Neumann, a man whose profound insight into the future value of an all-electronic calculating machine gives him the shared title of inventor of computer science (along with A. Turing), not the computer. This book leaves us no doubt, it was Eckert and Mauchly's creation, a plum that many others wanted credit for once it matured. The general purpose electronic computer is fittingly the invention of an electrical engineer (Eckert) and a visionary physicist (Mauchly). This is also a good resource on the entry by women into the world of computers. I was only disappointed that McCartney did not include a bit more of the technical, engineering details about ENIAC, and its comparison to the COLOSSUS, perhaps in an appendix.

Anybody who has taken an introductory computer science course has heard about how Mauchly and Eckert built ENIAC, the first electronic computer, which was originally intended to compute artillery shell trajectories during World War II. Here is the amazing story of the building of ENIAC, and how Mauchly and Eckert deserve far more credit for this triumph than the customary footnote they are usually given in computer science textbooks. After all, it was they who actually turned theory into real electrical wiring and vacuum tubes. This book questions whether John von Neumann deserves as much credit as he is sometimes given for being the "Father of the Modern Computer."

From the other reviews of this book you get the impression the author got the basic facts wrong. I think the author did an outstanding job writing the story of the ENIAC, and covered much of the controversy up until the death of Pres Eckert in 1995.

Holding aside the issue of whether the ENIAC was the first 'computer', or whether Maulchy 'stole' Atanstoffs ideas, and the apparent (and successful) attempt of John von Neumann to take much of the credit for ENIAC and EDVAC, the book does an excellent job of telling a fair and well-researched account of events.

I give this book 5 stars because it is well written, well researched, and holds your interest. There is much controversy over who invented what when, and I think this book admirably takes the side of Maulchy & Eckert, two visionaries far ahead of their own time.

In the final analysis does it _matter_ if Anastoffs single-purpose partially electronic computer (which was never completed and was denied a patent) was the first computer? I think what matters is that the ENIAC was the first viable electronic digital computer built and used for a number of years, and in that light this is an excellent book to read all about it.