Accelerator boards - no future? Bad business?

[Dave G4UGM]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Noel
> Chiappa
> Sent: 25 April 2016 17:51
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
> Cc: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu
> Subject: Re: Accelerator boards - no future? Bad business?
> 
>     > From: Jules Richardson
> 
>     > I think my personal view is that I'll consider modern replacements
to
>     > things when it's impossible to use the originals - but not simply
for
>     > reasons of speed, cost, convenience.
> 
> This sounds like it's not _that_ far from my position, which is that I am
against
> building modern equivalents for "stuff that is still available and
perfectly
> functional".


I perhaps take a slightly more permissive view. I am happy to use modern
parts if they allow me to keep an old machine operational AND can be
installed and removed in a non-destructive manner.
For example my PC server 500 has an unreliable floppy. I intend to add a
GoTek board so I can update the ADF files safely. 

> 
>     >> running the disks ... risks damaging what are effectively museum
>     >> pieces.

But if you don't run them then you might as well just display empty boxes...

> 
>     > There I'd just say run them until they break and can't be fixed, and
>     > then they can become static museum exhibits.
> 


> The problem with that is that I feel that it conflicts with what I feel
one of our
> main goals ought to be, which is to preserve these machines in running
form,
> for history and the education of future generations.
> 
> Yes, even powering them on risks a failure, but most failures are
repairable.
> A crashed head, if you don't have spares, is pretty much un-fixable
(there's a
> whole manufacturing complex needed to create them, which is now gone,
> and one can't substitute an alternative part). So I'd run them as little
as
> possible - and a modern solid-state alternative really helps with that.
> 

There used to be places that re-built drives after a head crash. Not sure if
they still exist.

> (BTW, there's a big debate in the museum world over this sort of topic:
some
> places won't do any cleaning and fixing of antique objects, retaining them
> exactly as they were, and living with the degradation of plastics, etc;
others
> do restoration, but mark what was done, and make it reversible if
possible;
> others go all out and restore things to 'like new'. I'm kind of in camp
II,
> myself.)
> 
> There's also a practical down-side to the 'run it as a matter of course
till it fails
> forever' approach; if one has packs for that drive which one wishes to
read or
> write, that's no longer possible once the drive is roached (although
someone
> else could do it for you, but that's not necessarily a desirable option).
> 
> And of course, with the drive dead, the machine may not be runnable unless
> one adds a modern alternative - and if one's willing to do that _after_
the
> drive is fried, why not before?
> 
> 
>     > From: Swift Griggs
> 
>     > I might be laughed at for wanting a Fiero-Ferrari
> 
> For a good time, Google 'Jerrari'! :-)
> 
> 	Noel

Dave