>At the 80386 introduction, there were
>two firsts -- the Compaq Deskpro 386 and the IBM PS/2 80 (the Compaq was
>first, as I recall). Those machines are borderline collectable, in my
>opinion.
And when you look at the machines churned out by
Gateway et al,
the composition of the parts inside the box changes day by day.
How can that be collectible?
Maybe not as easy as PETs and Apples, where the inside didn't
change a lot, but if you compare them to the cars of the 60s
and 70s they have a lot in common - a wide variety of names
and companies, but most are just believed to be common crap.
And within a blik of an eye they are vanished and become
desirable. Also, see the technical aspect, they are so fast
changing that it's realy hard to get a full blown configuration
of one era.
<Partly Offtopic example>
I just have this problem for a PC I configured about two years
ago for my younger daughter - a BIOSTAR 8500TVD Board with an
K5 PR133. I choose this board since I thought about upgrading
it later on with an Pentium 200 (At this time the 200 was some
600 USD). Now, When I wanted to upgrade (she insists in using
Win95/8) a P200 isn't available any longer - and even K6 are
hard to find not to mention a K5 PR200.
</offtopic>
So maintinig such Systems will become a problem over the years.
And more complicated than any S100 or Apple.
BTW: why is an Apple // a classic ? There are still zillions
out there. In fact they are less collectible than most PC types
in term of rarety.
And to come bach for your question: I think this ~10 year
thunp rule is just as good as the 20 year rule for most
car collectors. A owner of a 1974 VW K70 is considered by
some 'real' collectors owning a 1936 Mercedes not a collector,
but I would disagree.
Gruss
Hans
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK