There are several element of the phenomenon that reduces the collectability of embedded devices and things like word processors. For context, here are the characteristics that, for me, make a machine interesting: interesting hardware design, interesting software design, ability to do something cool/geeky with it, and the influence it had on other designs. So with that in mind here's why I think we see the phenomena that Chuck describes. I suspect a lot of the problem is that they often aren't really so little. Many embedded devices are pretty much just a board unless they're connected to some other hardware, which is often so large that it inhibits collectability. Of course, no one here would turn down an AGC regardless of whether it was connected to a spacecraft. But most embedded systems only go so far without the other hardware. Personally, I think this is exactly why they aren't very interesting. Because they are so much like a general-purpose system, they don't have a particularly interesting hardware design, almost by definition. Their software is usually not particularly interesting either. But you are captive in that software. You can't really do anything interesting with them, except type letters. And for the most part, they didn't have much influence on the rest of computing. So, there's not much to draw me, or I suspect a lot of others, to them. As in all matters of opinion, YMMV. I certainly don't condemn anyone who does find those interesting and wants to collect them. For that matter, I do have a few embedded devices in my collection. But a lot of them are actually ones that I worked on in former lives. That's really why they're interesting to me. BLS