10 year rule

From: Doc Shipley <doc_at_mdrconsult.com>
Date: Wed Nov 17 19:14:31 2004

Bob Shannon wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doc Shipley" <doc_at_mdrconsult.com>
> To: <news_at_computercollector.com>; <General_at_mdrconsult.com>;
> "Discussion_at_mdrconsult.com :On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
> <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 12:31 PM
> Subject: Re: 10 year rule
>> Computer Collector E-Mail Newsletter wrote:
>>> The terms are too similar, people will just get more confused.
>>> All I intended to do when I started this discussion topic was to
>>> point out the
>>> obsurdity of considering things like the Web and Pentiums as
>>> "vintage" (or any
>>> other synonym). But then others observed back that I was being
>>> short-sighted
>>> -- if you ignore that actual age, "vintage" just means "anything
>>> considered
>>> obsolete by the mainstream," and that's a good enough answer for me.
>>> But I do
>>> think that 15 years, not 10, is a better divider between what's just
>>> "old" and
>>> what's truly vintage.
>> I think you're all looking at this completely backwards.
>> The rate of electronic evolution (OK, change) has *accelerated* over
>> time, meaning that computers are obsoleted much more quickly than
>> their older counterparts. Therefore the age limit for this list
>> should be *lowered* to about 8 years now.
>> Sometime in about 12 years a computer that's two weeks old will
>> qualify as a classic.
>> I'll be grabbing my hat....
>> Doc
> I think the problem with this discussion is partly that age does not
> equal collectability.
> Lets not even discuss the concept of 'value' and really muddy the
> waters. But in any
> type of 'collectable' items, mass-production, commodity products are not
> as desirable
> as a rare or hand-made version.
> Think of nails here, a hand-wrought vintage nail is a lot more
> interesting than one you
> might find in a modern hardware store.

   Or, an example that's sitting in front of me right now - an SGI 320 "PC".

   It is a PC, and a pretty recent one, in that it runs Windows and is a
dual-PII. As a matter of fact, to my eternal disgust, it will *only*
run Windows in graphics mode.

   However, it's a decidedly non-commodity system. SGI used a custom
BIOS that bypasses a lot of the x86 legacy cruft and is optimized to the
NT/Win2k OS family. Very fast RAM, all SCSI, very high-end graphics,
and one of the first Wintel systems to drop PS/2 in favor of USB HIDs.

   Plus, they're so ugly they're cute.

   Since my spousal equivalent retired her W98 Athlon in favor of an
eMac, the only PCs in the house have been the Linux files/DNS/DHCP/MOPS
/TFTP server and a little Soekris firewall. But when this 320 and its
flat panel came available, I jumped on it without a second thought. I'm
not very sure what I'm gonna do with a Windows box, but I'm sure I'll
think of something.

   Now I just wish I could afford the ~$300USD for a DVI multilink
adapter for this 1600SW.

   Anyhow, the point is that since it's not 10 years old, and it only
runs Windows, it's not "classic" by the conventions of this group. It
*is* a major departure from commodity PC hardware, though, it is fairly
uncommon, and I wouldn't blush a bit about discussing it on this list.

> The 10-year rule, as I understand it, is intended to prevent the list
> from degenerating into
> a WinTel support group.

   You guys do realize that my 8-year suggestion was a joke, right?

Received on Wed Nov 17 2004 - 19:14:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:37:17 BST