USING classic machines

From: tiborj <cerebral_at_michianatoday.com>
Date: Thu Jun 26 20:05:47 1997

At 04:07 PM 6/26/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>>What worries me is that in a lot of cases, the older machines are more
>>useable than the modern Wintel equivalents. This applies both to a new
>>user (somebody who just wants to write 2 page letters does _NOT_ (or
>>should not) need a 166MHz Pentium with 16Mbytes of RAM), and to 'hackers'
>>who want to understand their machines. It's possible for one person to
>>complete understand both the hardware and software of most classic
>>computers - something that (IMHO) is not possible with a Wintel box.
>
>>Same here. In reality I use my s100 crate, ampro, and sb180 to produce
>>8048/9 and 8051 code as they really are faster and easier to use. Also
>>being as I have them interconnected it's easier to blast proms in the
>>s100 crate. Efficient, very! I've had nearly 20 years to refine the code
>>and tools! I have the advantage of having source code for those tools so
>>and long latent bugs are easily squashed. This is not doable on PCs.
>
>>I still do my banking/checkbook on the kaypro! Faster than the PC
>>overall.
>
>For a while there, I was thinking maybe I'm in the wrong group.
>
>I see a LOT of traffic about restoring and collecting old computers,
>and the typical member here is one who has a large collection of
>different machines, but except for a rare question about boot disks,
>there isn't much said about using these machines. When I turn on my
>99/4A or Geneve, it isn't primarily to bask in a nostalgic glow, but
>to write something or balance my budget or do some programming.
>Certainly the nostalgic glow is there, and it adds a dimension to
>the computing experience that peecee devotees cannot understand. But
>it IS my primary workhorse, not just a desk queen.
>
>Don't get me wrong; I love to hear about these old machines, so keep
>those messages coming. But I would like to hear from others out there
>who use their obsolete machines (I prefer "non-mainstream machines")
>for practical, everyday, household computing uses.
>
>In fact, I'm wondering how widespread my idea is (shared by a
>few, apparently) that the smaller, simpler machines really are well
>suited for home use, and you don't need a high-end peecee for nearly
>everything you want to do.
>
>--
>**********************************************
>* David Ormand *** Southwest 99ers *
>* dlormand_at_aztec.asu.edu *** Tucson, Arizona *
>**************************** TMS9900 Lives! *
>

I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a
modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full
photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am
not a member of the dark force, I just have a multitude of machines, and I
have EXPERIANCED running them, from an apple ][ +, C=64, IBM XT, and a 586-133.
we must have an open mind about this, as there are some who still never ran
anything NEW, and pass judgment about how bad a machine is when they have
never used one.
Received on Thu Jun 26 1997 - 20:05:47 BST