New Definiton REQUIRED

From: HOTZE <photze_at_batelco.com.bh>
Date: Sun Nov 16 13:26:14 1997

Okay.... recently, there's been lots of "off-topic" stuff going on here
about computers... but I think that it's not "off-topic." In my mind,
there is no doubt that the early mass-produced CD-ROM drives (not the
origionals of 1984, but the ones that were made to be put into PCs, not
servers) are classic componets, even though many are of this decade.
In my opinion, the first 486 PCs (not servers) are classics... ones that
are still used, but classics... even though most of 'em were made in
like 1991-93... arguebly, early Pentiums (60, 66 Mhz) could be classics,
as they steped into a new era (superscaler arceticture) for the
mass-production market even though the Pentium chips wern't even on the
market until mid-1993... if you remember, in the "welcome" message, it
said that it was hard to state the definiton of a classic... but 10
years or older would do. I do not wish to offend the owner, but they
are one person, and they can make mistakes... and together, as a group,
the chances of making an accurate definiton are smaller with us.
Possibly (out for MUCH revision...) is the definition "Any computer
which has aged sufficently to be considered "outdated" by the computer
market and has historic signifiance, OR is 10 years old or older." The
one evedeint place that requires revsion is the "historical signifiacne"
but I'm not sure how to include that while still aknowladgeing the
presence of many of the best machines and componets that did indeed fail
in the process... but at least Wang's did eventually fall.... I can't
even rememeber all of the problems that they had...
    Openly, innocently, and waiting for improvement (on my quote, not
the other stuff,),

    Tim D. Hotze
Received on Sun Nov 16 1997 - 13:26:14 GMT