Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule.

From: Will Emerson <wpe101_at_banet.net>
Date: Sat Jan 23 18:11:51 1999

I strongly agree with this!

                                 Will


Computer Room Internet Cafe wrote:
>
> I personally feel the 10 year "rule" is useful as a guide, however, I also
> consider that there are several machines that rightly qualify as "Classic
> Computers" that are less than 10 years old. There is a particular "grey"
> area in that a particular machine might span the period. I suppose
> logically, we should look at when a particular box was FIRST made.
> I have 2 Vax 6000's here (which I propose to the list are a "Classic"
> regardless of age") one is 89 manufacture and therefore (just) 10 years old.
> The other is a 1990 build. Microvaxen have been around for a fair while
> now, but I am given to understand they are still orderable, new, from
> Digital. IMHO, I would also class ANY Microvax as a "Classic" regardless of
> age.
> In fairness to all, it's unlikely that we want to see extensive discussions
> of the vagaries of Pentium II's discussed here (for some years at least!)
> but I am confident that the 10 year rule is meant to guide us, not shackle
> us to a time frame. i.e. IF you have a machine that is less than that age,
> or you wish to discuss it on the list, and IF you consider it to be a
> classic in it's own right, then I suggest it be put to the list. IF the
> consensus of list members is that it should be classed as a classic, then so
> be it.
>
> Just my 2c worth. Your opinions and/or mileage may vary.
>
> Cheers
>
> Geoff Roberts
> Computer Room Internet Cafe
> Port Pirie
> South Australia.
> netcafe_at_pirie.mtx.net.au
Received on Sat Jan 23 1999 - 18:11:51 GMT