24 Jan
1999
24 Jan
'99
10:07 a.m.
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Geoff Roberts <netcafe(a)pirie.mtx.net.au> wrote:
] I personally feel the 10 year "rule" is useful as a guide, however, I also
] consider that there are several machines that rightly qualify as "Classic
] Computers" that are less than 10 years old. There is a particular
"grey"
... snippage ...
Unless the list-maintainer gets active, "on-topic" is by concensus.
We all started with the ten-year rule in the sign-on message, but it
is obvious that not everybody takes that seriously.
So, since it is a matter of concensus, here is my vote.
1. Ten years is just a guideline. If something is only 9 years old,
I won't much mind hearing about it. I might even like it. But if
it is only two or three years old, there must be a surviving
users-group or something. Go find it, or start your own, but please
don't clutter up my mailbox with it.
2. Nothing PC- or Mac-compatible can ever be classic. Sorry, that's
just an indisputable fact. :-)
3. Guns, cars, schools, Star Trek, and politics are not classic computers.
(This is not to disparage people interested in those things, just to
point out that those discussions belong on other mailing lists.)
4. Simply having origins in something that is classic does not make a
thing classic. Otherwise *everything* would be classic.
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.)
6. Do I really need to add "IMHO" here? :-)
Cheers,
Bill.
24 Jan
24 Jan
10:48 a.m.
Bill Yakowenko <yakowenk(a)cs.unc.edu> wrote:
So, since it is a matter of concensus, here is my
vote.
[...]
2. Nothing PC- or Mac-compatible can ever be classic.
Sorry, that's
just an indisputable fact. :-)
Sure, it can be classic. Ten years after the industry stops manufacturing
and selling PC-compatible or Mac-compatible computers.
So a Macintosh 128 wouldn't be classic now, but if Apple stopped making
any Macintoshes (or Mac-compatible computers) in 2017, the Macintosh 128
would become a classic in 2027. Or slightly later, based on your rule 5:
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.)
11:48 a.m.
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Bill Yakowenko wrote:
4. Simply having origins in something that is classic
does not make a
thing classic. Otherwise *everything* would be classic.
Here's the dictionary definition of "classic" that I think most of us mean
when we use the word in the context of this list:
Having lasting significance or worth; enduring.
The problem is that "significance" and "worth" are personal judgement
calls. I really think it's futile to try to define acceptable criteria.
How about defining it this way:
Discussions related to machines no longer supported by their
manufacturers, with the exception of old IBM PCs, Macs, and their
clones.
-- Doug
1:44 p.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1669 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990125/e135ed1f/at…
25 Jan
25 Jan
7:50 a.m.
] I personally feel the 10 year "rule" is
useful as a guide, however, I also
] consider that there are several machines that rightly qualify as "Classic
] Computers" that are less than 10 years old. There is a particular
"grey"
... snippage ...
Unless the list-maintainer gets active,
"on-topic" is by concensus.
If I may add here - he _is_ active - not acting as teh big boo-boo
doesn't mean beeing non existent - After all, I guess nobody wants
a dictatoric on/of topic thing.
We all started with the ten-year rule in the sign-on
message, but it
is obvious that not everybody takes that seriously.
So, since it is a matter of concensus, here is my
vote.
1. Ten years is just a guideline. If something is
only 9 years old,
I won't much mind hearing about it. I might even like it. But if
it is only two or three years old, there must be a surviving
users-group or something. Go find it, or start your own, but please
don't clutter up my mailbox with it.
THere are 'surviving' user groups for machines that are
_way_ older than 9 years - and before getting deeper into,
this is not a user group !
And for the mailbox thing - what about a filter ? No, serious,
from my simple point, all this /11/ stuff is useless
(help, no,
no, I didn't mean is - pleeeeease :) and just adds trafic. But
I also read them, or at least open them and have a look, since
sometimes, beside stupid facts, how to configure a special card,
or device, there are beautiful insights and stories - and BTW,
the 11 is not classic (since still available new, or at least
have been sold new less than 10 years ago) nor there is no other
support - there are _plenty_ of specialised lists, user groups
and news areas. I even learned to love this PERQ thing (now I
just need to get one :).
2. Nothing PC- or Mac-compatible can ever be classic.
Sorry, that's
just an indisputable fact. :-)
Boooo - shuld I throw my Apple II PC into the garbage ?
They are - no mater what rules you want to apply - they are
older than 10 years - there are no longer in production
models, there are machines with unique abilities, there
are units that made special imact in one or the other way
(or are famous for not having any impact at all).
3. Guns, cars, schools, Star Trek, and politics are
not classic computers.
(This is not to disparage people interested in those things, just to
point out that those discussions belong on other mailing lists.)
Guns ? Depending.
Cars ? At least related somewhat.
Schools ? Hey, this discusion was _very_ on topic at all !
Thats where our next collectors generation is growing, and
it's part of our mission to take our idea of old technik
use and preseravion to them. Themes like that is waht this
list makes so different - it's not just 'put this IC into
that socket' type of mails, it's about real people doing the
real thing in the real world, with all interactions. Not just
technik dummys.
And for the Star Trek part - Of course, ST had no infuence
to the idea of computers et all - you're right (BTW1: when
was the last occurance of ST in this list ? BTW2: OT: I'm
still searching on data for the Star Wars premiere)
4. Simply having origins in something that is classic
does not make a
thing classic. Otherwise *everything* would be classic.
But looking at the origins visible in a new product is still
a _very_ on topic thing - otherwise we would just ignore the
world of the last 10 years. And it's one of the most interesting
things about this hoby, to see how the things have evolved,
how small and insignificant (at this time possibly good) decisions
have breed new monsters (see A20 gate :). The advantage of an
historian is not only to review a specifig period, but also
trace the ways leading there, AND leading from there to 'now'.
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.)
If we go for an 'exact' date, I think the mfg date of the
specific unit is the only possible anchor - just think of
machines like the A2 - acording to your definition it wont
qualify. I would even go one step further and use the date
of first production as base for the rule (as often done
within the list - best practice rule). Just remember that
new machines always have been escorted by a increased
attention and speculation (no, not today :). This event
itself is classic and part of the history, and the acording
machine. No mater if the Mac is still in production or not,
the small guy, saying "I'm glad to be out of this bag"
_is_ classic, without any doubt.
6. Do I really need to add "IMHO" here? :-)
No, as always, we interprete anything we want into your
words :)
To get to an end: I still think the 10 year thing is a
thump rule, not a law - and as rule we don't need _exact_
fixings, since this would just force the development of
pseudo exact exemptions (Do I have to mention all these
laws, where our beloved politicians want to do is best,
and most exact as possible, and then spend the next 10
years to add sub laws without even touching the problem ?).
And, to say it once more, I don't think this list
'unmaintained' - our 'boss' is just _not_ one of
the I-know-it-all-and-I-will-rule-them guys.
Gruss
H.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
8:01 a.m.
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Hans Franke wrote:
The original intent of the 10 year rule has been lost upon the more recent
members of the list. Bill Whitson created the Ten Year Rule to prevent
this forum from becoming just another PC discussion group. He wanted the
discussion to stay generally on the topic of discussing old computers. So
by making the charter preclude discussion of computers under 10 years old,
he hoped to avoid people fielding boring questions that are better asked
elsewhere, in forums that are specifically catered to those particular
needs.
Since there was no specific forum for discussing old computers that wasn't
susceptible to spam and noise (i.e. alt.folklore.computers doesn't
qualify) he wanted to create one where people would be required to take
their contemporary junk elsewhere. I don't think the intent of the rule
was ever to totally and unequivocally deny discussions of interesting
contemporary stuff, or to disallow asking the occasional emergency help
question for PC or Mac related stuff (I'm very glad for that because this
is the smartest group of people I know to exist on the planet and I have
taken advantage of this fact by fielding the occasional modern day PC
question when I needed a quick answer).
So, I know it would be futile to hope this permanently recurring thread
would stop recurring, but if everyone would just keep this in mind, and we
would finally have a FAQ that would be required reading to all new-comers
that explains this before they are allowed to post, then I think we could
finally put this issue to rest...permanently.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Always being hassled by the man.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 01/15/99]
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.)
If we go for an 'exact' date, I think the mfg date of the
specific unit is the only possible anchor - just think of
machines like the A2 - acording to your definition it wont
qualify. I would even go one step further and use the date
of first production as base for the rule (as often done
within the list - best practice rule). Just remember that
new machines always have been escorted by a increased
attention and speculation (no, not today :). This event
itself is classic and part of the history, and the acording
machine. No mater if the Mac is still in production or not,
the small guy, saying "I'm glad to be out of this bag"
_is_ classic, without any doubt. 
1:13 p.m.
The original intent of the 10 year rule has been lost
upon the more recent
members of the list. Bill Whitson created the Ten Year Rule to prevent
this forum from becoming just another PC discussion group. He wanted the
discussion to stay generally on the topic of discussing old computers. So
by making the charter preclude discussion of computers under 10 years old,
he hoped to avoid people fielding boring questions that are better asked
elsewhere, in forums that are specifically catered to those particular
needs.
I've been saving all the messages about the ten-year rule, and I was going
to make an official pronouncement when I had enough time (after reading all
the messages first). But since Sam has spoken, now's my only chance to up-
stage him in my role as moderator! :) Besides, Sam's viewpoint seems to be
pretty close to my own.
The list has a welcome file which should get sent to all new members. I
edited it recently, mostly to add a few tips about list commands and to take
out the dire warnings ("This list is going away!"). I think I mentioned
that I had changed it but I don't know how many people saw the new version.
The welcome file mentions the ten-year rule. It mentions allowable and un-
allowable violations. It even implies that the rule is a bit of a double
standard, in the sense that it's OK for the topic being discussed to drift
away from the ten-year rule. (It doesn't actually out-and-out say that
that's OK. This is one of the connotations of my term "double standard".)
To be honest, the off-topic messages I've seen are blatantly off-topic.
I can remember only a handful of messages (if that) dealing with modern PCs.
So, I know it would be futile to hope this permanently
recurring thread
would stop recurring, but if everyone would just keep this in mind, and we
would finally have a FAQ that would be required reading to all new-comers
that explains this before they are allowed to post, then I think we could
finally put this issue to rest...permanently.
Well, the welcome file is such a FAQ. It should be sent to newcomers by the
list-processing software. Unfortunately, there's no way to make sure anyone
has read it as a requirement to posting.
Unlike policing topic drift (a power which I've assumed only to a low
degree, far below the full possible amount) I do see list maintenance as an
important duty. I want to set up the old WWW site and FTP archives. (I'm
working with Bill on that -- I just need to actually get in touch with him.)
I want to add new material. In the past, Bill posted announcements on USE-
NET, and having those announcements is on my list of things to do. That
would probably help eliminate this debate.
Of course since we're a very vocal bunch of people (as well as smart), it's
probably not possible to completely eliminate the debate.
-- Derek
1:17 p.m.
New subject: Olivetti M20 information
Hi
Making a call for anyone with info on the
Olivetti M20. It was a Z8000 machine.
Dwight
1:59 p.m.
New subject: Olivetti M20 information
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Dwight Elvey wrote:
Making a call for anyone with info on the
Olivetti M20. It was a Z8000 machine.
It was designed in Italy. What else do you need to know? :-)
(I know one of the designers, if you really need specific details.)
-- Doug
6:48 p.m.
New subject: Olivetti M20 information
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Dwight Elvey wrote:
Hi
Making a call for anyone with info on the
Olivetti M20. It was a Z8000 machine.
Wow, sounds cool. Is this a portable like the M10? If so, that would be
wild! A Z8000-based portable!
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Always being hassled by the man.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 01/15/99]
7:08 p.m.
New subject: Olivetti M20 information
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Sam Ismail wrote:
No, they made a portable called the M22, but it was just an 8088 box (I
think mine is a prototype :-).
I *think* Oli made a couple of interesting Zilog boxen, though, perhaps
even a Z80,000 box. I'll ask my Italian friend about it again.
-- Doug
Olivetti M20.
It was a Z8000 machine.
Wow, sounds cool. Is this a portable like the M10? If so, that would be
wild! A Z8000-based portable! 
26 Jan
26 Jan
3:53 a.m.
New subject: Olivetti M20 information
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 731 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990126/70208e9d/at…
7:18 a.m.
New subject: Olivetti M20 information
Sam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, Dwight Elvey wrote:
Sorry Sellam, it is a deck top unit. Two floppy drives, printer port,
serial, black&white monitor and a HP-IB as I recall.
Dwight
Hi
Making a call for anyone with info on the
Olivetti M20. It was a Z8000 machine.
Wow, sounds cool. Is this a portable like the M10? If so, that would be
wild! A Z8000-based portable!
Sellam
9385
days inactive
9387
days old
12 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
ckaiser＠oa.ptloma.edu -
dastar＠ncal.verio.com -
doug＠blinkenlights.com -
dpeschel＠u.washington.edu -
elvey＠hal.com -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
Hans.Franke＠mch20.sbs.de -
yakowenk＠cs.unc.edu