29 Aug
2006
29 Aug
'06
8:38 a.m.
At 2:45 PM +0200 8/29/06, Hans Franke wrote:
Am 28 Aug 2006 21:14 meinte Jay West:
I personally think that this pretty much sums it up. The 10 year
rule is the bedrock of the list.
And Hans, I think you'll find you've been here a *LOT* longer than
five years :^)
There *IS* no 10-year rule. I'm really
getting tired of saying that. It's
not that the very concept is wrong, it's just outdated. It doesn't work
after a certain point.
Well, at the time I signed up to this list - and that's like
more than five years ago, there was this rule, and it never
got modified - course not, since it's one of the basics of
this list. If someone likes a list without this rule, it
would be best to open up his own. The 10 year rule is a great concept of benchmarking for
easy
judgeing. Ans just because we oldtimer see anything after 1980
as modern unworthy stuff, it doesn't mean it realy is. Time is
moveing ahead and new stuff becomes old and 'classic' to new
people. Just think of 70s and 80s cars. To me, they have no
classic apeal at all, but there is already a collector scene.
Come on, a 1978 Golf, or similar is just good to be used as
scrap metal for new cars - well, they are collectors items!
One needs to accept the fact that time moves on. The worst to
do is to set fixed dates - that's a shure way to become a
sidenote in history.
So, let's stay with the great list we have.
This is a *perfect* way of explaining this fact, and remember that
the life span of computers are a lot shorter than that of cars. I
have a '72 Dodge Pickup, it looks like it belongs in the junk yard,
but it runs great. Recently someone who had no idea that it actually
runs, offered to buy it.
There is a reason for the 10 year rule in the definition of classic.
That is/was set in stone and still should be. There is also a reason
for the "coolness exemption", which while not set in stone has been
recognized by the membership at large.
I agree that there is a problem with off-topicness on this list. I
honestly don't know how much, as I don't read every message. My
*KEY* complaint is people not changing the subject when the subject
of the thread drifts. I know I've missed out on threads that I'm
interested in due to this, and I've gone far farther than I have time
in threads that I've become disinterested in due to this.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh at aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| MONK::HEALYZH (DECnet) | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |