To all with interest in preservation

[...] I am not sure... I suspect that many people here do like to run the physical hardware, but that I am one of the msot 'extreme' people when it comes to this split. I am very much an 'electronics' person and find beauty in the circutiry (if there's any to find :-)). I can find, say, an intersting motoro control system to be just as interesting as a processor (and in fact more interesting than a standard microprocessor + memory type of design). Which doens't mean that _I_ think simulators have no use. They may have no use _for me_, but that;'s not the same thing at all :-) I suspect that's the a slight problem of licensing. The license status of old DEC OSes is not clear, and buying licenses (even if we could afford them) is non-triival. FOr taat reason people running real PDP11s either don't mention publically what they run, or run things that they can get the license for, like unix. Howewver, while those are certainly advantages when developing new software, fixing bugs and the like, in the end the final version o fhte softare should eb able to run o nthe real hardare, with the stnadard amount of memory and disk space, and at a reeasonalbe speed. If not, then I would argue you've not really written a piece of PDP11 software. [...] And on that point I totally agree with you. Let me relate a little anecdote... I have interests otehr than old computers (!). One of them is telephones, and I am a memeory of a relevant club. This club recently held a meeting near London, at the works of a company that restores telephone kiosks. Now, you also know that I am not exactly tactful, I tend to say what I mean. I went to said event, since it was pretty near. Now, telehpone kiosks are not really 'my thing;, I am interested (as you would guess) in the electrical/electronic side of telephony. But I said to the people form the company : 'Although I will be frank and say that this is not my main interest, I think it's graat that you are restoring and preserving the kiosks. They are certainly part of the history of telephones in the UK, and if everybody had the same intersts as me then that part of the history would be lost. We need people with interests in all aspects of telephony'. And I feel exactly the same way about classic computers. The software _is_ important. The marketting materials are important. And so on. They are not waht I am intersted in, but that's my loss. Classic computing (like the history of telephoens) is a very big area, and nobody can cover al lof it. So I'll do my bit, you do yours. And I will happily acknowledge that emulators have a place in many areas of the hobby. _However_. we started this discussion by what museums should and should nto do. And I still feel that museums, wherever possible, should run the real hardare, at least from time to time (perhaps of special 'running days' like some musems of stational steam engines, etc do). Her's another analogyy... Most people, I think, feel that a live musical consert (pick whatever sort of music you like) is somehow 'better' than a recording. That's not to say that recordings don't provide a lot of enjpyment, of course they do. But I think people would be very annoyued if they paid to attend a concerta and rather than hearing the band/group/orchestra/singers/,,, live they simply got to hear the output from audiop CDs (I am assumign the necessary copyright clearances, etc have been obtained). You can, in general, listen to recordings at home, you go to the concert for something 'extra'. Of coruse selling recordings of said music at rhe concert is probably a good idea, most people would buy the CD to listen to later. Now, goign back to classic computing, most people can run the emulators at home if they so wish. And the emulators do, undoubtedly, provide soemthign for hte 'feel' of the real machine. But if you go to the museum you should get soemthign rather more, something you can't get at home. And that probably means the msueum should run the real hardware. -tony