>>At the 80386 introduction, there were
>>two firsts -- the Compaq Deskpro 386 and the IBM PS/2 80 (the Compaq was
>>first, as I recall). Those machines are borderline collectable, in my
>>opinion.
> And when you look at the machines churned out by Gateway et al,
> the composition of the parts inside the box changes day by day.
> How can that be collectible?
Maybe not as easy as PETs and Apples, where the inside didn't
change a lot, but if you compare them to the cars of the 60s
and 70s they have a lot in common - a wide variety of names
and companies, but most are just believed to be common crap.
And within a blik of an eye they are vanished and become
desirable. Also, see the technical aspect, they are so fast
changing that it's realy hard to get a full blown configuration
of one era.
<Partly Offtopic example>
I just have this problem for a PC I configured about two years
ago for my younger daughter - a BIOSTAR 8500TVD Board with an
K5 PR133. I choose this board since I thought about upgrading
it later on with an Pentium 200 (At this time the 200 was some
600 USD). Now, When I wanted to upgrade (she insists in using
Win95/8) a P200 isn't available any longer - and even K6 are
hard to find not to mention a K5 PR200.
</offtopic>
So maintinig such Systems will become a problem over the years.
And more complicated than any S100 or Apple.
BTW: why is an Apple // a classic ? There are still zillions
out there. In fact they are less collectible than most PC types
in term of rarety.
And to come bach for your question: I think this ~10 year
thunp rule is just as good as the 20 year rule for most
car collectors. A owner of a 1974 VW K70 is considered by
some 'real' collectors owning a 1936 Mercedes not a collector,
but I would disagree.
Gruss
Hans
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Received on Tue Nov 03 1998 - 06:51:33 GMT