Dec or Digital Networking

From: Mail List <mail.list_at_analog-and-digital-solutions.com>
Date: Thu Sep 4 02:23:00 2003

Hello Don,

> Or, why not simply items that apply/relate to equipment at least
> 10 years old?

That too. In fact, upon further reflection, I thought that there might still be
items that were released 10+ years ago, that might now be considered
classic, but might still be being manufactured new, and still sold, even by
the original equipment manufacturer. No specific example comes to mind,
but there must be some. So, I thought a refinement to be, "items which were
originally released 10 or more years ago, regardless of whether or not still
being made and sold", and as you have suggested, "items that apply/relate
to equipment at least 10 years old" might be the best definition to apply as
to whether or not an item is, or is not, on topic.

Best Regards




At 08:43 PM 9/3/03 -0700, you wrote:
>On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Mail List wrote:
>
> > Hello Antonio,
> >
> > > And the original definition of on-topic was something like
> > > "not sold commercially for at least 10 years"; under that
> > > definition this would clearly fail.
> >
> > There are a whole lot of items that most would consider on-topic that
> > third party commercial dealers are still selling. A better definition might
> > be items that haven't been sold by the original equipment manufacturer
> > for 10 years.
> >
> > Best Regards
>
>Or, why not simply items that apply/relate to equipment at least
>10 years old?
> - don
>
> > At 06:06 PM 9/3/03 +0100, you wrote:
> > > > It is probably a bad idea to spam (even if it is ~on-topic)
> > > > your fans,
> > >
> > >It's no more on-topic than it would be if HP were spamming
> > >about the new ES47 (unless dnpg are still selling* the
> > >HUB90 stuff and friends).
> > >
> > >Antonio
> > >
> > >[*] And the original definition of on-topic was something like
> > >"not sold commercially for at least 10 years"; under that
> > >definition this would clearly fail.
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >
> > >---------------
> > >Antonio Carlini arcarlini_at_iee.org
Received on Thu Sep 04 2003 - 02:23:00 BST