---
My reply:
The intent of this rule is to get machines that are as close to their original
condition as possible for historical accuracy.
In your example, since the mod came with the Model 4 then it would be an
acceptable addition (with proper documentation).
I'll address this issue more in further comments.
>
> c) System Completeness
>
> The judges can deduct points for any part of the computer that
> is incomplete. A complete computer is one that includes the
> peripherals that were originally used on the computer or typical
> peripherals that would have been used with the computer if
> applicable.
Does this mean _every_ peripheral that was ever made for the machine,
every peripheral that was made by the original manufacturer, or just a
representative sample of them? I'm having problems thinking of an Unibus
PDP11 (say an 11/45) with every option DEC ever made connected to it :-)
A representative sample is what we had in mind. The more that are included
in the exhibit the higher number of points in that category will be awarded.
---
From: CLASSICCMP_at_trailing-edge.com
> The judges can deduct points for any part of the computer that is
> not original as built by the manufacturer, or as constructed at
> assembly time for kits. Replacement parts must be indicated to
> the judges by the competitor. New old stock parts will be
> considered to be replacement parts with a lesser point
> deduction. A reproduction can not receive full points in this
> category.
Interesting set of rules, with an interesting sense of "purity". In
the real world, of course, someone who bought an IMSAI and populated
it with only IMSAI peripherals was a fool. And it also leaves out
the richness of computing that is (was) possible - take a look in the
back of a late 70's BYTE and you'll see hundreds of manufacturers making
a huge variety of S-100 boards. Yet any computers demonstrating
this richness, so important in the early personal computing industry before
the dominance of the PC-clone and the subsequent dull monotony of
compatibles, lose points in this proposed judging scheme. Oh well,
different strokes for different folks.
---
My reply:
In formulating these rules we started out with the basic rules of a classic
car show since the parallel to computers is considerable, and modified them
accordingly.
This particular rule really applied to the more "packaged" computers, like
the the TRS-80, Commodore and Atari, etc. We really didn't have S-100
type machines in mind.
But your argument is entirely valid and we definitely over-looked this
class of computer.
We'll re-work this rule accordingly, mostly to allow for third-party add-ons
to computers where this practice would have been the norm.
---
From: Dave Dameron <ddameron_at_earthlink.net>
> The judges can deduct points for any part of the computer that is
> not original as built by the manufacturer, or as constructed at
> assembly time for kits. Replacement parts must be indicated to
> the judges by the competitor. New old stock parts will be
> considered to be replacement parts with a lesser point
> deduction. A reproduction can not receive full points in this
> category. Any consumables do not have to be authentic. Any item
> that has questionable authenticity or originalty needs to have
> supporting documentation.
So I would be penalized for getting my SWTPC CT-1024 video terminal to work
and enter it? First I changed the number of characters/ line from 32 to 64.
Then I added a cassette "bit bopper" to it. I found the 60Hz line sync
didn't work right, so took it out. Lastly, I added some graphics display in
parallel to the characters. Now 20 or so years later, it doesn't seem to
work, and the "original" ic's are all soldered in.
---
My reply:
A stock computer is generally more representative of the original. However,
there are definitely some cases where a modification was required to the
original to fix a bug that came from the factory and was pretty much
mandatory if that machine was to be useful.
We'll re-work this rule to expand the allowability of modifications to
computers that really required them to work correctly.
---
From: CLASSICCMP_at_trailing-edge.com
>Like Tim said, nont one member of LICA has a "pure" machine. Some part
>was non stock and often the reason was price or availability. I can't say
>how many Altair and IMSAIs with floppies from neither vendor were seen.
Or, as I understand the rules, it would penalize someone who hooked
a Model 33 Teletype to their Altair because MITS didn't make the Teletype.
Yet the Teletype is the most singularly classic input/output peripheral
of the era. And if you didn't have a Teletype, users generally had some
surplus keyboard hooked to their S-100 box (heck, look at the very first
issue of _BYTE_ which features "surplus keyboards" as the cover story!).
Yet again, you get penalized in the judging for configuring your machine
as it would have typically been configured by an actual user in that day.
---
My reply:
No, in this case a Model 33 Teletype would be a perfectly acceptable add-on
to the computer since it certainly was a typical configuration.
The rule in question really applies to modifications or add-ons to the
computer or associated hardware itself. Additional hardware that was
used with the computer to make it a whole system would make for a better
exhibit. An Altair with an Altair VCT or Comter terminal would probably
earn more points than one with an ASR-33 since those are stock Altair,
but also because they are far more rare than an ASR-33 and would be nice
to see as part of the exhibit. But an ASR-33 would not cause the exhibit
to lose points.
---
Lastly, there was a question about the requirement of the $10 registration
fee. The fee is not to make money off of the exhibitors, but is intended
to hopefully get exhibitors to stick to their committment to exhibit.
Putting on an event like this requires planning and money. If 30 people
sign up to exhibit but then only 15 show up, that could amount to a
lot of extra equipment and space that has been rented and paid for going
to waste. I don't know if $10 is even enough to lock in a committment,
but I didn't want to make it so high as to scare people away. I just
hope that those who sign up to exhibit follow through and do show up with
an entry. If it proves to be a problem then we'll have to think of
something different next year, but I hope it works out fine.
As we come up with modifications to the rules they'll be posted to an
updated version of the complete rules posted to the VCF website. The
web site is being re-worked for the next few days so you won't see them
right away but they will be there.
Please continue to ask questions or suggest improvements to the rules.
This being the first year we are bound to have some bugs in the process,
but with everyone's insight and input we should be able to conduct a fair
competition, which is the intent.
I hope to see many participants in this first competition!
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar_at_siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 04/03/99]
Received on Wed May 26 1999 - 05:33:57 BST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:26 BST