At 09:45 PM 1/12/98 -0800, you wrote:
>
>
>On Mon, 12 Jan 1998, Uncle Roger wrote:
>
>> > Portable Computer: IBM also called the 5100 a "portable computer". I
>> >guess they considered it a portable computer because everything was in one
>> >unit. It was certainly NOT portable in the sense that one person could
>> >pick it up and move it around. It's huge and it's heavy and there aren't
>> >even any handles on it. Not to mention the fact that it has an
unprotected
>>
>> No handles??? 'Tain't a Portable then!
Hey, I didn't say it was portable! I own one remember (grunt!). That's
what IBM said! IBM also said that it was a "personal computer", but I
wonder how many people could afford a $15,000 computer in 1975! (or '76,
'77, '78 etc etc)
Joe
>>
>Well, the Gavilan is portable and it has no handles. IIRC the RDI Bright
>Lite (spelling could be wrong) is "portable" even though it has no handle.
>(It is not yet a classic. Actually, I believe that the Powerbook 190
>does not have a handle either). In fact a quick survey of the machines
>in the room:
>
>NEC PC-8201A - no handle
>NEC Starlet - no handle
>Epson PX-8 - handle
>AT&T 3B1 - no handle
>Sun 3/60 - no handle
>
>Hmmm, maybe having handles isn't the best criteria for determining if a
>machine is portable.
>
>It seems that portable machines are those which the manufacturer built
>to be easily picked up (in some cases without grunting too loudly) and moved
>to another location to be used. This holds for suitable values of "easily".
>Where I could pickup the 3B1 and take it into work with me everyday, I
>have a difficult time believing that this is what AT&T expected.
>
Yeah, my HP-41 doesn't have a handle ether!
>Yes, Roger. I know you were kidding.
That says it all!
Joe
>
>--pec
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>The Antique Computer Collection: http://www.wco.com/~pcoad/machines.html
>
>
>
Received on Tue Jan 13 1998 - 09:05:54 GMT