Repair or Replace? [Was: Repairing Timex]

From: Mark Gregory <>
Date: Mon Jul 17 15:41:25 2000

I'm curious to know how list members feel about the question of repairing
versus replacing common computers.

For example, in my area, Commodore 64s are extremely common. So if I
received a bad one, after checking for obvious faults I probably wouldn't
spend much time trying to troubleshoot it. It's easier to just find a
working one. The bad machine would either become a static display, or a
parts donor, or a very low priority rainy day project.

>From some previous discussions on the list, I believe that some people feel
that every classic computer (regardless of rarity) is worth saving. Many
electronic hobbiests may find as much joy in repairing the broken 64 as in
playing with a working one. These are completely valid viewpoints. However,
I could also argue that the limited time I have to spend on this hobby
would be better spent trying to document a rare find, or repair an unusual
computer, than in repairing yet another C-64.

How do list members (especially those with large collections) feel about
this? Repair, replace, both?
Other viewpoints welcomed.

Mark Gregory
Received on Mon Jul 17 2000 - 15:41:25 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:57 BST