4 Oct
2007
4 Oct
'07
1:09 p.m.
I am puzzled by people who want to run old hardware,
but who don't
want to learn to repair it to component level. I can understand why
people want to run the software under emulation (even if that's not
what I want to do), but I am seriously wondering what extra you get
from running the old machien _other_ than being able to fully
understnad and repair the hardware.
Well, speaking personally....
I'm not hardware-antipathic; I know which end of a soldering iron to
hold [the cool one :)], and I've hacked together assorted electronics
on occasion (a few of which I've even mentioned here). However, most
of my on-topic hardware, I have no particular interest in repairing
below the board-swap level.
So, while I can't speak for anyone else in this regard, I can perhaps
address your puzzlement as it applies to me.
Most of the hardware in question is SBus-era Suns. I don't run it
under emulation because an emulator, plus the hardware to run it on,
would cost me a lot more than the Suns cost me (which latter figure is
usually $0 + shipping, and often the shipping is $0 because they're
local). Then, consider some additional points:
- Speed - emulators are usually slower than the real thing. An
emulated setup capable of matching the real thing's speed will be
substantially more expensive.
- Hardware compat - I have some oddball SBus cards. I daresay
PCI-to-SBus, ISA-to-SBus, etc, bridges exist, but they will be
expensive, probably difficult to find, and may not even play nice
with the emulator.
- Reliability - as I think I've mentioned before, peecee-class machines
account for a rather disproportionate fraction of the hardware
failures I've experienced. "Modern" machines as reliable as the old
Suns are doubtless available, but, again, that will mean a
substantial additional cost.
So, really, it's a total no-brainer for me whether to run the real
thing or an emulation, quite aside from whether I'm prepared to do
low-level repair work.
Now, some of my stuff isn't SBus-era Suns. Much of *that* stuff I *do*
want to be able to repair down to the chip level - for example, I have
some hp300 hardware with, I suspect, a blown HP-IB driver (last time I
tried to use it I was seeing what looked like a stuck-at fault). When
I get the round tuits together, I'm going to see if I can confirm/deny
my suspicion, and (if confirmed) pull a compatible driver chip from
something else and do a swap. Perhaps someday I'll be applying the
same philosophy to (say) the SPARCstation 20, and, if that happens,
I'll probably then be glad I'm not chucking "dead" hardware....
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B