Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule. - test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

24 Jan 1999

-----Original Message-----
From: Allison J Parent &lt;allisonp(a)world.std.com&gt;
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
&lt;classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu&gt;
Date: Monday, 25 January 1999 9:44
Subject: Re: Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule.

...
 <5. The ten year rule should apply to the date when
a thing dropped off
<   in popularity; if it was still in common use eight years ago, it is
<   not yet classic.  (Justification: if it is still in common use,
<   there will be other places to discuss it.)

Humm. This one is tough.  We talk about VAXen and the MicroVAX is only
about 14-15 years old and some models do persist but they are uniquly
new compared to others. Example, we wouldn't be talking about 6xxx series
as the oldest ones are early 90s. 
Ahem, I've got one here that is stamped 89.   I understood they went into
production in 88.
I have another that is stamped JAN 1990.  I suggest that these are "classic"
machines in their own right anyway, age notwithstanding.  However I would
accept the consensus of the list members on the legitimacy of this.   How
say you?

...
 The keys are OLDness, UNIQUEness and desireability. 
I'm sure there are
technical aspects that would qualify like machines with unusual word
length or the like but, they should be 80s or earlier in introduction
or common use.

So long as it's related to the collecting, preserving and discussion
centered around older machines there is little conflict. 
Agree totally.   As I said earlier, the 10 year bit should be a guide, not a
lockout.

All of this is IMHO only, of course.....

Cheers

Geoff Roberts

Computer Room Internet Cafe
Port Pirie
South Australia.
netcafe(a)pirie.mtx.net.au