Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [midatlanticretro] Re: swap meet item cutoff

Expand Messages
  • Evan Koblentz
    Herb, as usual, makes excellent points. ... Done! I decree that MARCH hereby excludes common IBM-type Windows PCs. Like the bartender said at Mos Eisley, We
    Message 1 of 40 , Aug 4, 2006
      Herb, as usual, makes excellent points.

      >>> exclude common IBM-type Windows PC's

      Done! I decree that MARCH hereby excludes common IBM-type Windows PCs.
      Like the bartender said at Mos Eisley, "We don't serve their kind here!"

      Herb, thanks for helping us clarify that. :-)

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Herb Johnson [mailto:hjohnson@...]
      Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 3:08 PM
      To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [midatlanticretro] Re: swap meet item cutoff

      I'm glad Dan made the points he posted, as below. Frankly I'm not terribly
      concerned about the definitions of "vintage" vs. "classic"
      computers. It's a useful distinction for discussion, but I would not expect
      universal agreement as to specifics. To me these are terms of convenience at
      best. Anyway, my interest is what can be offered to other MARCH members at
      other venues (if not at the current Deleware event). I hope this is not a
      discussion about what is the acceptable computer interests of MARCH.

      More to Dan's point, and mine from earlier: in the small-size computer
      world, there were large-company computers built for the mass market of the
      1980s like Commodores and Amigas; computers built roughly before and during
      that period by small companies (S-100 and single-board systems in boxes);
      and computers built in both periods for scientific and business (or Dan's
      term "industrial") use, by SGI and Sun and so forth. IBM kind of straddles
      between "industrial" and "personal"; they weren't the cheapest computers at
      that time but some became cheap much later, while some did not. It's hard to
      make distinctions by time, easier by categories like these.

      To make my point, I went on the Web and also used my memory, to look at a
      slice in time for all these kinds of systems. Pick a year, say 1990. You had
      an SGI Indy built in 1990 - a small scientific and graphics computer by a
      then-big company; also an Apple IIsi system.
      Most of the Atari product line was pre-1990; Commodore's Amiga 2000 and 2500
      were available in 1990 says the Web. IBM probably made 386 AT systems in
      1990, the '486 was new, and Windows was at 3.0.

      But there's a whole bunch of fun systems of the 1990's that are missed by
      that cutoff. Almost all the early Macs; many early, small SGI and Sun et al
      graphics systems; some of the IBM and Compaq systems. HP made a number of
      industrial computers, DEC straddled the industrial and personal markets.
      DEC, HP, SGI, and Sun built graphics systems, some with with embedded BASIC
      or PASCAL, that had capabilities not available in PC's until several years
      later. This might be comparable to early gaming machines with their faster
      graphics and better play action than most PC's of the same period.

      (Of course not all computer collectors are interested in gaming or graphics.
      Some interests are more technological, or product line, or
      brand.)

      Mostly, a cutoff date of 1990 or so excludes a lot of "industrial"
      systems that people had fun with at work but could not hope to afford at
      home. Now, as collectors we can own those systems and use them!
      Isn't that one point of collecting old stuff? The other point is to SHOW
      what we have; or SEE what others have. I don't collect Atari's but I had fun
      seeing them at the Vintage event; I hope others would enjoy seeing some
      graphics in action from the "industrial" machines.

      So I see a point in setting a date around the late 1980's, if your goal is
      to exclude common IBM-type Windows PC's, or conversely if you want to
      specialize on Amiga/Commodore/Apple II early personal systems & game
      machines. But I think it's more up-front to make distinctions as I've
      described, than by year alone. Anyone excluded by any of these distinctions
      will presumably be included in the next event - so I assume - and there's
      nothing wrong with events with different focus.

      Maybe I should organize an "industrial graphics" event to make my point. A
      lot of old iron, heating up a room, to play Spacewar would be pretty
      impressive I think! An Indy with what would be called a Web cam today - very
      cute, any interest? The only argument would be whether to accept a PDP-11
      with a Teletype playing "hunt the wumpus" on a printed grid of text as
      "graphics" or not! But I'd say give 'em a room with a lot of ventilation and
      soundproofing and let the Teletype roar! But bring a vector display too.
      Maybe a winter event at InfoAge would be appropriate to dissipate the heat
      from such "big iron". But you get the idea.

      Herb Johnson

      --- "Evan Koblentz" <evan@...> wrote:
      >
      > >> I think the qualifying factor for being vintage in any breed of
      computers
      > is more of a logarithmic scale than linear in terms of years. It can
      > be difficult to have one specific cutoff to cover all categories of
      systems.
      >
      > Agreed.
      >
      > I think a textual definition, although difficult to get right, would
      > ultimately serve the hobby better than a chronological cutoff.
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Dan [mailto:ragooman@...]
      >
      > I hope that I could interject a comment here, but only to express a
      thought,
      > not to prolong the thread.
      > Something that seems to be missing here is the distinction between
      consumer
      > and commercial/industrial systems.
      > PC's are obviously consumer products while systems such as SUN's,
      Sequent's
      > are commercial(and others are industrial).
      > The commercial/industrial machines were always a couple generations
      ahead in
      > technology back then.
      > Nowadays, the distinction is beginning to blur, but I think the
      > pricing difference still keeps it in focus.
      > The term vintage seems to blur the age difference between consumer
      products
      > and commercial/industrial machines.
      > Any machine that is outdated doesn't easily qualify it as being
      vintage(or
      > classic).
      > You can have vintage consumer products and vintage industrial
      systems, all
      > being computers, but starting from a different year.
      > I think the qualifying factor for being vintage in any breed of
      computers is
      > more of a logarithmic scale than linear in terms of years.
      > It can be difficult to have one specific cutoff to cover all
      categories of
      > systems.
      >
      > just my 2cents,
      > =Dan







      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Dan
      I use to play Wumpus back in High School in the 70 s on a Honeywell 1646 minicomputer. Teletype and all (could never find what happened to that machine) whadda
      Message 40 of 40 , Aug 4, 2006
        I use to play Wumpus back in High School in the 70's on a Honeywell 1646
        minicomputer.
        Teletype and all (could never find what happened to that machine)
        whadda flashback that is

        =Dan

        .----------------------------------------------------------------.
        [My Corner of Cyberspace http://ragooman.home.comcast.net/ ]
        [Pittsburgh Robotics Society http://www.pghrobotics.org/ ]
        [Pgh Vintage Comp.Society groups.yahoo.com/group/pghvintagecomp/ ]
        .----------------------------------------------------------------.




        Herb Johnson wrote:
        >
        > The only argument would be whether to
        > accept a PDP-11 with a Teletype playing "hunt the wumpus"
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.