'Real Computers' (was Re: Trivia Question)

From: Eric Smith <eric_at_brouhaha.com>
Date: Sat Feb 22 17:02:01 2003

I wrote:
>> Even if it's the dual Athlon XP 1900 running Red Hat 8 which I use for
>> most of my software development. There's no question that it has
>> orders of magnitude more computing power, memory, and disk, but that's
>> not part of my criteria for "real computer":

Patrick Finnegan wrote:
> OK, I've got a few problems with this. Personally, I think you're
> confusing the terms 'vintage' or 'classic' and 'real' mostly. For
> reference, I'll use three computers. One very new - an IBM p690
> "Regatta" system, a 'just classic' machine ~10-11 y.o.- an IBM RS/6000
> model 520, and a fairly classic machine - an IBM System/36. I've used
> both the p690 and the 520, and sort-of-used a System/36.

I'm not sure why you "have a few problems with this". All three of those
machines meet three out of four of my criteria for being considered "real
computers", whereas PCs meet none of them.
Received on Sat Feb 22 2003 - 17:02:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:35:56 BST