Collection policy was Re: No space for vinatge computers in

From: Tony Duell <ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat May 24 18:08:44 2003

> Well some museum people function like archeologists, they want to leave the
> machine in the state they found it in the wild. People like you want to
> restore the machine to the same state it left the factory most likely. Very

Not necessarily. We want to restore it to a working state. This could
well be the state it was in when it was last used, with all the ECOs and
user modifications left in place (assuming they're not preventing the
machine from working, which might not be the case with some of the
modifications I've seen made by previous owners!)

A case in point. I know a museum which has a straight-8. They are missing
2 flip-chip cards from it. I happen to have a box full of boards pulled
from a straight-8 (no, the chassis was not around when I got to grab the
cards, and no I wasn't involved in pulling them). I offered said museum
the 2 cards they needed, free of charge. They didn't want them because
the date code stamped on the board was 2 years too late.

A few points

1) I would have had no objections to these cards being marked as
non-origianl replacement parts, or a log being kept of what parts had
been fitted or replaced (I would have expected that)

2) Fitting these cards would have in no way damaged the rest of the
machine -- they could have been pulled out again to return the machine to
its current (non-working) state

3) The machine in question was not an original obtained from DEC and
never used. It was a machine that had been used for many years before
being donated to the museum. What's the betting that some flip-chip cards
were replaced while the machine was in use?

> Like I said before museums have static displays for reasons of power
> requirements, lack of personnel that can run the machines, spare parts that

So don't run them all all the time. Run selected machines on special
'operating days', like what's done with preserved beam engines, etc.

> are expensive and hard to find, and the fact that a screwup during operation
> could actually destroy one of the few remaining examples (or only one). Most

I doubt it would destroy the machine in the sense that it could no longer
be used as an exhibit, or indeed that it could no longer be restored
again. In that sense, a machine that had been restored and then failed
during the museum demonstration is no different to a machine that's never
been restored.

> devices in a museum are there for either art or function (or combination).
> The older machines are not much to look at without being powered up and
> running. I am 34 years old and I have seen a punch card reader, but never
> seen one hooked up and running. I have never used an 8" floppy, or run the
> earliest PC's that did computations via dip switch settings on the front

One reason I started restoring computers was so I could do all these
things (FWIW, I've run a paper tape punch and reader, a card reader, 8"
floppies, etc. I've toggled in may programs on front panel swtiches. I've
punched a card on a 12-button hand punch, I've edditied paper tape by hand.

The equipment needed to do all those things is not particularly rare...

> Firearms have evolved over 100's of years and the original versions still
> have alot in common with current units. People of today can relate to how

Are you seriously implying that the internals of a fairly modern computer
and one made, perhaps, 30 years ago are significantly different? Because
I find them to be very similar...

> the original versions were used even without using one. Compare this to
> computers that are only 60+ years old. Does a person who has a PC today have
> any idea what the monster computer that took up a whole room in 1946 does
> and how? There was no monitor, no keyboard, and no mouse they are totally

TO me those are peripherals, not really the computer.

> different today, how can people relate to this? While there are still a few
> people who know how to make a horseshoe at a blacksmiths there will be
> nobody who knows how to run the early mainframes in 50 years, things are

Rubbish!. Are you seriously trying to tell me that these skills can't be
learnt? I would claim that anybody who _truely_ understood a modern
machine would have no problems on an older one. The fact that very few
people understand modern computers is the problem, not that the older
machines are so different.

-tony
Received on Sat May 24 2003 - 18:08:44 BST