Richard Erlacher skrev:
>I've been surprised at the number of "collectors" who don't care a bit about
>whether an otherwise pristine piece of hardware is working or not. All they
>seem to care about is how "cool" it looks. Frankly, to me, a computer that
>doesn't compute is just a bunch of parts taking up more space than they
>should.
As for me, I'm very interested in the aesthetic part of computing. I love my
Goldstar HC-200 MSX, even though it's been absolutely smashed internally.
After all, it's got such a colourful keyboard and a light pen holder. If it
worked, it would be even more fun, but even as it is, I sometimes take it out
and just admire it.
I'm an accumulator in the sense that I take just about every computer I come
across. OTOH, it's not a matter of keeping my old computer (though I still own
each and every one I've bought), instead I keep lookout in Usenet, on the web,
talk to people or go to the junkyard in order to make my collection grow. But
the state of a system is secondary to the system itself. If it works and is
cosmetically perfect, it's great, but even if not, who knows, one day I might
run across a complementary system so that I might restore it.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
It's amazing how many useful pieces of equipment are disguised as domestic
appliances: the machine for cleaning keyboard keycaps and shell cases does an
excellent job of washing clothes, while the tumbling machine for drying them
off also works for socks and shirts. The device in the kitchen for baking
small spray-painted articles can be used for pizza and muffins. And so on...
Pete Turnbull
Received on Sun Aug 05 2001 - 07:40:24 BST