25 Apr
2016
25 Apr
'16
10:43 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Noel
Chiappa
Sent: 25 April 2016 17:51
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Cc: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Accelerator boards - no future? Bad business?
to
From: Jules Richardson
> I think my personal view is that I'll consider modern replacements > things when it's impossible to use the
originals - but not simply
for
reasons of
speed, cost, convenience.
This sounds like it's not _that_ far from my position, which is that I am
building modern equivalents for "stuff that is
still available and
perfectly
functional".
I perhaps take a slightly more permissive view. I am happy to use modern
parts if they allow me to keep an old machine operational AND can be
installed and removed in a non-destructive manner.
For example my PC server 500 has an unreliable floppy. I intend to add a
GoTek board so I can update the ADF files safely.
>> running the disks ... risks damaging what are effectively museum
>> pieces.
But if you don't run them then you might as well just display empty boxes...
There I'd just say run them until they break
and can't be fixed, and
then they can become static museum exhibits.
The problem with that is that I feel that it conflicts
with what I feel
one of our
main goals ought to be, which is to preserve these
machines in running
form,
for history and the education of future generations.
Yes, even powering them on risks a failure, but most failures are
repairable.
A crashed head, if you don't have spares, is
pretty much un-fixable
(there's a
whole manufacturing complex needed to create them,
which is now gone,
and one can't substitute an alternative part). So I'd run them as little
as
possible - and a modern solid-state alternative really
helps with that.
There used to be places that re-built drives after a head crash. Not sure if
they still exist.
(BTW, there's a big debate in the museum world
over this sort of topic:
some
places won't do any cleaning and fixing of antique
objects, retaining them
exactly as they were, and living with the degradation of plastics, etc;
others
do restoration, but mark what was done, and make it
reversible if
possible;
others go all out and restore things to 'like
new'. I'm kind of in camp
II,
myself.)
There's also a practical down-side to the 'run it as a matter of course
till it fails
forever' approach; if one has packs for that drive
which one wishes to
read or
write, that's no longer possible once the drive is
roached (although
someone
else could do it for you, but that's not
necessarily a desirable option).
And of course, with the drive dead, the machine may not be runnable unless
one adds a modern alternative - and if one's willing to do that _after_
the
drive is fried, why not before?
Dave
From: Swift Griggs
I might be laughed at for wanting a Fiero-Ferrari
For a good time, Google 'Jerrari'! :-)
Noel