-----Original Message-----
From: Allison J Parent <allisonp_at_world.std.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Monday, 25 January 1999 9:44
Subject: Re: Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule.
><5. The ten year rule should apply to the date when a thing dropped off
>< in popularity; if it was still in common use eight years ago, it is
>< not yet classic. (Justification: if it is still in common use,
>< there will be other places to discuss it.)
>
>Humm. This one is tough. We talk about VAXen and the MicroVAX is only
>about 14-15 years old and some models do persist but they are uniquly
>new compared to others. Example, we wouldn't be talking about 6xxx series
>as the oldest ones are early 90s.
Ahem, I've got one here that is stamped 89. I understood they went into
production in 88.
I have another that is stamped JAN 1990. I suggest that these are "classic"
machines in their own right anyway, age notwithstanding. However I would
accept the consensus of the list members on the legitimacy of this. How
say you?
>The keys are OLDness, UNIQUEness and desireability. I'm sure there are
>technical aspects that would qualify like machines with unusual word
>length or the like but, they should be 80s or earlier in introduction
>or common use.
>
>So long as it's related to the collecting, preserving and discussion
>centered around older machines there is little conflict.
Agree totally. As I said earlier, the 10 year bit should be a guide, not a
lockout.
All of this is IMHO only, of course.....
Cheers
Geoff Roberts
Computer Room Internet Cafe
Port Pirie
South Australia.
netcafe_at_pirie.mtx.net.au
Received on Mon Jan 25 1999 - 01:59:22 GMT