I'm trying really hard to reach out and maintain
composure....
It is appreciated, and I hope you can see the point that myself and several
others are trying to get across. Please bare with my rambling in this
email. I'm trying to illustrate a point :^)
I would like to emphasis that I am not trying to pick a fight here. If
anyone feels that way, or feels like firing back a flame, please go do
something else for an hour or two. If you still feel the need to reply, try
to let logic rather than emotion dictate what you write.
Let me start by saying that what I right below is based on my perception
that the crux of this issue is that if the "10 year rule" is in effect, then
Pentiums and Windows 95 are on-topic.
Zane wrote....
> Wrong. The 10 year rule still makes sense. What you are saying is that
> no
> new systems will be added, and that this is a dying hobby.
Wrong. Just because I said the "10 year
rule" is no longer active on the
list, does NOT mean that in it's place is a firm year cutoff instead.
NEITHER are acceptable.
Even in the beginning the "10 year rule" wasn't considered to be perfect,
it
was a compromise. It was also recognized that an arbitrary cut-off at 10
years was bad, as systems newer than 10 years could be considered a classic.
Many here would consider even the newer SGI MIPS-based systems to be
classics, and unusual/rare enough to be at least semi-OT. Plus most
discussion related to even a Tezro would be largely applicable to an ontopic
SGI system.
At the same time, I for one consider the original dual CPU G5 PowerMac's to
be a classic. They are both a work of art, and a seriously impressive piece
of hardware. However, realistically they aren't on-topic. At the same
time, perhaps a G4 running Mac OS 9 could be considered to be at least
slightly on-topic.
Is an Amiga 1 with a pre-release version of Amiga OS 4 on-topic or
off-topic? Would it be considered a classic or not? It has also been
pointed out that some Amiga systems such as the A4000T were made as recently
as at least 1998.
I personally don't consider a Sun workstation a classic, I consider it a
workhorse. I'm sure there are plenty here that disagree. At the same time
I consider at least all pre-PCI Sun HW to be ontopic for this list.
Shoot, I don't even consider most (if not all VAXen) to be classics!
They're still widely used in businesses, and after the MicroVAX II, I for
one don't find the hardware that interesting. I do however, think that they
are great for supporting systems I do consider to be classics, namely
PDP-11's. BTW, I run a VAX 24x7.
I could go on, but I should hope this point is clear. The point is, what is
a "Classic" Computer is different from one person to the next once you
remove the "10 year rule". With the "10 year rule" it's easy to
say
something is a classic, without it, lets face it, that is a whole different
arguement.
> Just because the
> majority of us have no interest in a 10 year old PC, or Windows 95/NT4 is
> no
> reason to change one of the founding principles of this list.
You have to separate the concept of "age"
and "classic". No one is changing
anything actually. The intent was to have a place to talk about "classic"
computers, not just 10 year old computers. Win95 I don't believe is
"classic". I suspect it won't be for a long long time, maybe never, I
don't
know. But something over X years old isn't automatically classic. It's just
old. Classic is something apart from age.
To at least a sizable portion of this list, or at least the vocal portion,
including myself don't think of "Windows 95" as a classic. I personally
hated Windows 95. I personally never could keep a system running it for
more than a few months without it eating itself. It was the reason I
switched to the Mac. Still it is a piece of computing history and should be
considered a Classic.
This is like saying that a '57 Chevy isn't a classic because you don't like
Chevy's.
Since cars seem such an appropriate analogy here, I'll use them some more.
Let me start by saying that when I was younger, I thought 70's cars were
*UGLY*. To me a car from the 70's isn't a classic (shoot both my Dad and I
still drive trucks from the 70's). Yet, time has passed, and 70's cars are
now considered to be classics. Even I have to admit that compared to some
of the new systems, those cars from the 70's that are treated as classics
(you know the ones that are lovingly cared for as a classic), are beautiful
cars.
I gather that after about 25-30 years a car can be considered a "Classic".
When a person buys a car, I assume the average person expects to get at least
6-10 years out of it. When you buy a new computer, the average lifespan is
more like 2-4 years. On a home computer, if it is any older than 5 years and
you're going to start having problems running the modern software. As such
I maintain that the 10 years is still a pretty good date for declaring a
computer to be a "classic".
Still with cars, how much difference is there between a 25-30 year old
vehicle, and a brand new one? Some things that were high-end are now the
norm. Everything seems to be computer controlled, and they're pretty much
made of plastic rather than metal.
Now lets look at a PC of 10 years ago vs. today. Both are fairly average.
I'll even mention a few technologies that have come and gone during that
time frame). I added in the web browser as lets face it, the web is now the
computer to a lot of people.
Pentium Core 2 Duo (gone are countless processor families)
72-pin SIMMs DDR2 (gone are the plain DIMM's and Rambus)
IDE HD SATA2 HD
CD-ROM Dual Layer DVD Burner (gone are plain CD-R burners)
PCI Video PCI-E Video (Gone is AGP)
PS/2, Serial,
and Parallel USB2.0 & Firewire
14-15" CRT 17-21" LCD (often widescreen)
Maybe 10Mbit Gigabit
14.4k-~36k Broadband
Windows 95 Windows XP (gone are 98, ME, and 2000)
Maybe early web
browser Firefox 2.0 beta or IE7 beta (again countless gone)
Desktop main/ Probably a good split between desktops and laptops, plus
Laptop rare things such as thin clients, and "Media Center PC's"
While a PC is a PC is a PC seems to be the common view here (I've even said
it in explaining why I don't collect them), the fact is, it isn't true. I
didn't even realize how much change in the PC market there has been in the
last 10 years until I started writting this up. By comparison to a current
system, a lowly Pentium computer is a primative beast indeed. Why doesn't
this antique deserve to take it's rightful place as a "Classic"?
I think almost everyone here has a favorite platform, and it is almost
always something other than a PC. How many here are objecting to the idea
of a Pentium as a classic because the PC killed their favorite platform.
Now please stop, and think about what I said before you even consider
replying.
Zane