1 Jul
2016
1 Jul
'16
11 a.m.
Computers don't (yet) have voting
rights. :-)
But you're defining "spirit" and listing
criteria by which a machine is
appropriate or not. A PS/2 with an
80386 running Windows 3.1 is acceptable,
whereas a Packard Bell with an 80386
running Windows 3.1 is not. Yeah, you
and I would cringe at a PB being
discussed, but maybe there's someone out
there who really is fond of their PB.
So as Terry ("Tezza") acknowledges,
terms like "landmark," "classic,"
"collectible" are subjective (but I
don't think "vintage" is subjective --
that term is usually set by age alone).
This is why it's just easier to use a
single criteria -- age -- and leave it
at that. Why is age acceptable
everywhere else in collecting, but not
here? Otherwise, someone (the list
owner?) has to pontificate over a list
of acceptable computers. Good luck with
that.
I think we ended up going in knots before with what essentially boiled down
to, "anything above a certain age that's not a beige box PC qualifies."
Then
the problem became one of definining what a commodity PC was. Will old Intel
Macs qualify? (I'd say so, but I'm a Power Mac bigot.)
It can't be numbers sold, either, because virtually everyone agrees the
Commodore 64 qualifies as appropriate and that machine was the greatest
single selling model of computer of all time.
Unfortunately, I think we'll have to come to grips with the realization that
in 50 years, beige box and other sorts of (soulless) commodity PCs will be
primarily what survive amongst retro enthusiasts.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Atheism is a non-prophet organization. -------------------------------------