On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Roger Merchberger <zmerch(a)30below.com> wrote:
Subject: CoCo3's & Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule.
] >On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Bill Yakowenko wrote:
] >> 2. Nothing PC- or Mac-compatible can ever be classic. Sorry, that's
] >> just an indisputable fact. :-)
]
] But what about a "Mac Classic???" ;-) Methinks they're over 10 years old,
] and they have *classic* right in the name!!! ;-)
Oh boy, they guys at http://www.classic-computers.com/index.html must
be thrilled to suddenly be "on-topic"! :-)
] >> 5. The ten year rule should apply to the date when a thing dropped off
] >> in popularity; if it was still in common use eight years ago, it is
] >> not yet classic. (Justification: if it is still in common use,
] >> there will be other places to discuss it.)
]
] Erm, sorry... I (and I think most others would agree with me here) don't
] believe that would work correctly, either. My beloved CoCo3 is more than
] easily considered a classic here, as they *started* production in 1986 (and
] mine was the first one in over a 50 mile radius of my area), but they were
] still in production at least into 1990, and I know they were still in-stock
] items in Radio Shacks & RSCC's in 1990, maybe 1991.
I'm sorry to say this, being a bit of a CoCo nut myself, but if they
peaked within the past ten years, they are not yet classic. Of course,
they are right on the edge here, so you'd get no flames from me for
posting about them. I mean, they couldn't have peaked in popularity
after they were no longer being sold, right? So that puts them at
eight or nine years; almost ripe. But again, slightly off-topic !=
on-topic.
I'm guessing there will be a bell curve of opinion for any machine.
Maybe I'm in one of the tails. Does everybody else think that this
should be an "everything but this-year's x86" list?
] Due to active production and showroom floor presentation, I submit they
] were in common use less than 10 years ago... yet considered a classic by
] most everyone (and me) here.
I just had a little revelation. To me, classic means something more
than being old. And being terribly common, like being in every house,
negates that. When I think of classic computers, I think of machines
that had some personality, like a unique creation from an old sci-fi
movie. Electronic brains. Blinky lights. Arcane OS's. High voltage.
Made you feel like a mad scientist just to be able to dork around with
one.
CoCo's, as much as I like them, can't be that. Those and Atari's and
Commie's and, yes, even Apple-2's are just too darn ordinary to be
classic in that way. PDP's are classic because nobody (well, almost
nobody) has them at home.
I guess I'm unique in that. So I'll stop the tirade now. You've
still got to count my vote though. :-)
Cheers,
Bill.
] BTW, my CoCo3's serial # is 102404... anyone know if there are different
] serial number series for US-sold versus Canadian-sold CoCo3's? I purchased
] mine in Canada; much cheaper!
] =====
] Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- zmerch(a)30below.com
] SysAdmin - Iceberg Computers
] ===== Merch's Wild Wisdom of the Moment: =====
] for (1..15) { print "Merry Christmas\n"; }
] (from perl.1 man page, version 4.)
Perverse. I like perverse. :-)
I have plans one day to write a PL/M++, an object-oriented PL/M that has
classes... declared using based pointers.
- Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: John Lawson <jpl15(a)netcom.com>
>evening.. in the damn box with the rack slides for the drive) then I
>think I'll be completely perverse and write a VIC-20 emulator for
>it.
When the Prime 2550-II I rescued is finally up and running (I just
discovered the rare and missing Kennedy 9100 I/O cables this
evening.. in the damn box with the rack slides for the drive) then I
think I'll be completely perverse and write a VIC-20 emulator for
it.
Anybody who wants... you send me a reel o' tape and I'll return
it with the code. Stay tuned for Progess Reports.
I think it'll be in PL/1G.
Okay. 0630Z; time for beddie-bye.
Cheerz
John
ps: yawwwnnn....
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, allisonp(a)world.std.com (Allison J Parent) wrote:
] <5. The ten year rule should apply to the date when a thing dropped off
] < in popularity; if it was still in common use eight years ago, it is
] < not yet classic. (Justification: if it is still in common use,
] < there will be other places to discuss it.)
]
] Humm. This one is tough. We talk about VAXen and the MicroVAX is only
] about 14-15 years old and some models do persist but they are uniquly
] new compared to others. Example, we wouldn't be talking about 6xxx series
] as the oldest ones are early 90s. However BA123 based Microvaxen
] introduced in the 80s were still made in the early 90s and are able to
] run current version of the OS. They are old enough to be of interest.
First, are you telling me that Vaxen haven't dropped off in popularity
yet? Sure, some are still in use. But then, so are some valve-radios
(by collectors). Being in use isn't a problem; being in *common* use,
still being at the peak of popularity; *that* is what I would like to
avoid on this list. This list is (for me) a refuge from the marketing
crap that I get every day about current products.
So, I agree that Vaxen are classic, because they are well past their
prime. If some model of that peaked within the last ten years though,
it isn't classic yet. (Not that I'd mind so much, either. I'm just
arguing that it would be mildly off topic.)
] Another example is the DECMATE-III sold up to the early 90s but they are
] related too. Why, they run OS/278 and WPS both legacy software.
Yeah, and my Pentium runs CoCo software (via an emulator). And Pentia
are related to the 8080, so they have exactly the same two claims to
classichood. So lets talk about Pentia!
Not.
If they peaked in the early 90's, they are not yet classic. We can
argue about how far off-topic they are, but it is more than zero.
(x86 lose big here because they have not yet passed their peak.)
] The keys are OLDness, UNIQUEness and desireability. I'm sure there are
] technical aspects that would qualify like machines with unusual word
] length or the like but, they should be 80s or earlier in introduction
] or common use.
]
] So long as it's related to the collecting, preserving and discussion
] centered around older machines there is little conflict.
Agreed. Little off-topic == little conflict.
] Just my small cash investment in opinion.
Thanks for voting. "Vote early, vote often."
Cheers,
Bill.
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Max Eskin wrote:
] On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Bill Yakowenko wrote:
] > 2. Nothing PC- or Mac-compatible can ever be classic. Sorry, that's
] > just an indisputable fact. :-)
]
] How about a VAX emulating a PC?
The Vax is classic. When was the emulator written? :-)
] > 5. The ten year rule should apply to the date when a thing dropped off
] > in popularity; if it was still in common use eight years ago, it is
] > not yet classic. (Justification: if it is still in common use,
] > there will be other places to discuss it.)
]
] How do you define 'common'? What percent of the population must use it?
] What if it's uncommon in my city and common in yours?
I intentionally left that undefined. If we disagree about when
something passed its prime, then we may also disagree about it
being classic.
Do you think there are any great geographic differences in computer
usage? It may not be a practical issue, but it is an interesting
question anyway.
I suppose these things should also be settled by concensus. If
enough vocal subscribers are from Outer Sluterpia, where Univacs
still rule, and the Outer Sluterpian branch of Univac is still in
business, then we might have to stop calling Univacs classic (and
visit there with big U-haul trucks!) (But don't announce it on this
list, or Doug will be upset! :-P ).
In practice, I think this is a non-issue. There really is not
that much geographic difference in computer use in the areas that
our subscribers reside, and I think we can mostly agree on which
systems are still selling like hot-cakes and which are long past
that point.
Bill.
I received the email message below from one Andrew
Davie who resides in Australia. Thought there might
be subscribers to this list who could offer him some
aid.
Bob Wood
_____________________________________________________
> From: Andrew Davie <adavie(a)mad.scientist.com>
Bob,
I'm a computer collector based in Australia. Recently I posted a
queston on the 'net about moving computers and equipment
>from Russia. In reply, I was given your name as somebody who may have
some experience in the field. As you can see from
my sig at the bottom, I run a site devoted to Soviet Calculators.
Recently I've started branching into Soviet Computers, too -
but have yet to find a way to get bulky items reliably out of Russia.
I'm writing to see if you might offer me any advice / assistance ?
Cheers
A
--
adavie(a)mad.scientist.com
visit the Museum of Soviet Calculators at
http://www.comcen.com.au/~adavie/slide/calculator/soviet.html
a Yahoo!, Netscape, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek and New Scientist Cool
Site!
Andrew,
Wish I could help but have had no experience with Russia.
I have shipped computers from the US to Europe
but that is about the extent of it. Someone has given me
more credit than I deserve.
I will post your message on the classic computing listserve
and see if the worldwide participants to that message board
can provide you with some advice. I will forward any replies
I receive to you.
Good luck
Bob Wood
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Marvin,
Just to let you know... I had already put a bid on at least one of the items
you posted about, and I was planning to snipe another one. I'm not going to
tell you not to post your lists, but I'd be happier if you didn't.
- Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug <doug(a)blinkenlights.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Sent: Monday, January 25, 1999 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: Ebay: Stuff & Help needed with Osborne 1
>On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Marvin wrote:
>
>> I really thought and hoped this topic had died a well deserved death.
>
>Me too, but you couldn't resist. Might I suggest a compromise? I will
>host a special "Marvin's Ebay Advertising" list. Anybody can subscribe,
>and you can make as much noise and as many bidders miserable as you like,
>OK?
>
>-- Doug
>
>
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Andrew Davie wrote:
> An interesting quote from my ALTAIR BASIC manual...
> "The Software Department is at Ext. 3; and the joint authors of the ALTAIR
> BASIC Interpreter, Bill Gates, Paul Allen and Monte Davidoff, will be glad
> to assist you."
> So, where is Monte these days? I haven't heard of him before.
> A
I don't know the answer, but I have a similar question. In Time magazine
(IIRC), they had a big article on Billy G. and said that one of his
business partners died/was injured in a car crash. Who was this?
There is a guy in England that has or had one. I corresponded with him
<several years ago and sent him a copy of the manual. My search for the
<SC/MP at that time only turned up a couple of hits.
<
<
<> P.S.: I just unpacked my SC/MP kit - Original binder, with original
<> packed, still shrink warped, unassembled kit .... Herrgott I'M HAPPY :)
I have a sc/mp, docs for it and a few articles as well. Built mine way
back in '77 or so. Oh the national part number is isp-8A500 for the sc/mp
and isp-8a600 for the sc/mpII.
Allison
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Dauphin <ai705(a)osfn.org>
>In summary, there are plenty of items that languish. If it is only going
>to get one bid, that winning bidder may as well be you.
Wow, this was the first ebay post I appreciate. Alot of cool and
interesting items that had real rescue potential, the technologically
disenfranchised.
Unfortunately, to often what is hawked here aren't those ugly orphans
looking for a needed home but the gleaming poster children of this bright
shiny new investment opportunity. sol, altair, pdp, challenger, etc
OK, I've stopped channeling Norma Ray... *whew*
- Mike: dogas(a)leading.net
