30 Jun
1999
30 Jun
'99
6:16 a.m.
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 Glenatacme(a)aol.com wrote:
Hello Philip:
Thanks very much for the explanation. There are certainly a lot of factors
involved in determining the "value" and "collectibility" of
computers.
Target market, production numbers, public perception, etc. I have a
sentimental "soft spot" re the Timex/Sinclair machines . . . so I would
collect them regardless of perceived "value."
It's funny - I think many of us have a weakness for the machines we loved
years ago. I was at a big sales rollout of the Osborne 1 (I was the
security guard), and the concept of a serious computer you could actually
carry with you seized my imagination and still hasn't let go. I couldn't
afford the $1795 then, but a couple years later I bought my first
computer: a Compaq Portable.
I finally did get my hands on an Osborne, and it's still a thrill!
Sure, nowadays my Palm III is much more powerful and portable than my
Ozzie or my Compaq Luggable, but it doesn't resonate with the same feeling
of suddenly expanded horizons and endless possibility that those little
eye-straining cathode ray tubes do. Who cares what they're worth as
"collectibles" - they're magical memory machines to me.
-- Bill, getting positively maudlin