1 Jun
2005
1 Jun
'05
4:06 p.m.
On Tue, 31 May 2005, Randy McLaughlin wrote:
I would argue that history is lost if _any_ change is made, and
certainly if any part is replaced.
What it comes down to, really, is 'is the benefit from making that change
worth the loss of history'? Since non-working computers have little
interest, I would claim that replacements needed to get or keep a machine
going are likely to be worth doing. But I am still not happy with
replacing a part just because you don't want to buy the right tool.
Also, please remember that this machine is owned by a museum. I would
expect museums to have higher standards for preserving originality than
most enthusiasts. Pity this doesn't seem to be the case.
-tony
To replace an original part with a different part
with no valid reason it is
a shame, part of history is lost for no good reason.
The argument then boils down to what is or is not a "valid" reason, and
whether the change is enough to get in an uproar over (i.e. "history is
lost" if two screws are replaced).