28 Jan
2005
28 Jan
'05
6:12 a.m.
MS wrote:
Or perhaps it shows how you are limiting yourself. Many of the things that
I use a computer for are either not practical, or just plain impossible on
one of my Classic Computers. Granted, part of what I do could be done on
one of my PDP-11's, but it's impractical because I'd then have to copy the
result to my Mac and rework it.
Zane
Computer Collector Newsletter
<news(a)computercollector.com> wrote:
Define "non-Classic", after all by this lists definition of "Classic"
you'll
be able to run Windows 95 in a year. If you're limiting yourself to your
VAXen and the like, the time is going to come when you won't be able to get
Hard Drives to replace dead ones.
As for the question of using a classic computer as my *primary* machine, no
I don't. My primary systems are a Dual 2Ghz G5 PowerMac and an IBM
Thinkpad. OTOH, I also daily use systems at home that are almost classic,
and some of the systems I support at work actually are now!
Do you mean you use a classic computer as your **
primary ** machine, or just
that you happen to use it ** once in a while ** for your current work?
The former. I do not own any non-Classic computers and never will.
I do not use any non-Classic operating systems and never will. But in
day-to-day
'real life', I can't fathom using anything other than a modern system
running
some equally modern version of Unix or Windows.
The fact that you can't fathom it signifies nothing but a limitation of your
imagination. It is possible and I am the living proof. I believe our Prof.
Tony Duell is the same way.