23 Apr
2012
23 Apr
'12
11:20 a.m.
[...] I relaised you can't really compare
like with like. Thew old
computers that I (and others here) run are oftne very expensive
manchiens (when new), as opposed to the <$500 stuff that most people
have today. It can't be fair to compare the build and reliabiltiy of
those.
I'd say, yes and no. from the local shop. I do not find that suprising.
Take, for exmaple, one of my SS20s. A modern machine built with the
same kind of engineering care and attention that went into that SS20
quite possibly _would_ be the more reliable of the two - I have no real
basis for comparison there.
My only conserni is things like lead-free solder. Tin whisker growth is a
problem, and I am not sure that it can be easily avoided. I do know that
it's a problem in all sorts of modern stuff...
But when compared in terms of what's common - what my employer put on
employees' desks at work back 20, 30 years ago, versus what my employer
puts on employees' desks at work today (or, in my case, would if I
Indeed... Go back 40 years and there was essentially only one desktop
computer (HP9830). It's built like a brick outhouse, and mine still runs
(albeit with some minor repairs over the years). On the otehr hand it
cost rater hmnore than a family car at the time.
Now you can get very cheap (relaitelve) computers. It's not suprinsing
that they are not wrll made. And alas too may people -- indeed too many
compaines -- buy on price alone.
I guess what really saddnes me is that you can't buy a PC built like an
HP9830 (metaphorically) at any price. Yes, there are relaible devies
made nwo, but jsut try to buy one.
-tony