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

Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros - less of the more familiar

Expand Messages
  • Jim Scheef
    Hello all, I just finished reading the last 50 messages in the group, so here come my comments... ;-) The exhibit of 70s/80s micros should be as broad as we
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 22 7:52 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello all,

      I just finished reading the last 50 messages in the group, so here come my comments... ;-)

      The exhibit of 70s/80s micros should be as broad as we can make it. If all we show is what visitors already know (the popular micros), people will brand us as lame - and rightly so! The exhibit should include a little of the familiar (Apple II, C64, Altair) and the more esoteric like Ohio Scientific, rare CP/M machines, etc. There should be less of the familiar (rotate them in and out to keep things fresh) than the more unknown. If people already know about all of the machines, what is there for them to learn at our museum? And that last point is most important. Each exhibit should include information about each machine that explains why it is cool. What are the pioneering features? Was it the first mass market computer of its type? When? Why?

      Jim

      ----- Original Message ----
      From: "schwepes@..." <schwepes@...>
      To: "midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com" <midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 4:59:49 PM
      Subject: RE: [midatlanticretro] Exhibit planning - 70s/80s micros


    • Evan
      ... You make several good points here. I don t * completely * agree but it gives me some ideas. I think it s very important to permanently exhibit the eight
      Message 2 of 3 , Jun 22 8:36 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        >>> The exhibit of 70s/80s micros should be as broad as we can make it. If all we show is what visitors already know (the popular micros), people will brand us as lame - and rightly so! The exhibit should include a little of the familiar (Apple II, C64, Altair) and the more esoteric like Ohio Scientific, rare CP/M machines, etc. There should be less of the familiar (rotate them in and out to keep things fresh) than the more unknown. If people already know about all of the machines, what is there for them to learn at our museum? And that last point is most important. Each exhibit should include information about each machine that explains why it is cool. What are the pioneering features? Was it the first mass market computer of its type? When? Why?

        You make several good points here. I don't * completely * agree but it gives me some ideas.

        I think it's very important to permanently exhibit the eight micros from our list -- those are the eight most important ones ever, in my opinion. (It could be compelling to expand it into a "Top 10" just because such lists tend to get people thinking, which is the result that we want! Then again, 8 is a byte / octal, and we could use the occasion to explain to visitors why we chose 8 instead of 10. Seriously!)

        Regardless of whether it's 8 or 10, I think we should keep those seperate (i.e. one side of the exhibit) with an emphasis on "these are the special ones" somehow and (on the other side of the exhibit) we can explain how it isn't just the top 8 or 10 that are historic; these other computers visitors never heard of are historic too and here's why.... And yes we should definitely switch those up but keep the first 8 or 10 there permanently.
      • Sridhar Ayengar
        ... Bleh! The 8-bit byte is a somewhat random choice in itself! Peace... Sridhar
        Message 3 of 3 , Jun 22 9:45 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Evan wrote:
          >>>> The exhibit of 70s/80s micros should be as broad as we can make
          >>>> it. If all we show is what visitors already know (the popular
          >>>> micros), people will brand us as lame - and rightly so! The
          >>>> exhibit should include a little of the familiar (Apple II, C64,
          >>>> Altair) and the more esoteric like Ohio Scientific, rare CP/M
          >>>> machines, etc. There should be less of the familiar (rotate
          >>>> them in and out to keep things fresh) than the more unknown. If
          >>>> people already know about all of the machines, what is there
          >>>> for them to learn at our museum? And that last point is most
          >>>> important. Each exhibit should include information about each
          >>>> machine that explains why it is cool. What are the pioneering
          >>>> features? Was it the first mass market computer of its type?
          >>>> When? Why?
          >
          > You make several good points here. I don't * completely * agree but
          > it gives me some ideas.
          >
          > I think it's very important to permanently exhibit the eight micros
          > from our list -- those are the eight most important ones ever, in my
          > opinion. (It could be compelling to expand it into a "Top 10" just
          > because such lists tend to get people thinking, which is the result
          > that we want! Then again, 8 is a byte / octal, and we could use the
          > occasion to explain to visitors why we chose 8 instead of 10.
          > Seriously!)
          >
          > Regardless of whether it's 8 or 10, I think we should keep those
          > seperate (i.e. one side of the exhibit) with an emphasis on "these
          > are the special ones" somehow and (on the other side of the exhibit)
          > we can explain how it isn't just the top 8 or 10 that are historic;
          > these other computers visitors never heard of are historic too and
          > here's why.... And yes we should definitely switch those up but keep
          > the first 8 or 10 there permanently.

          Bleh! The 8-bit byte is a somewhat random choice in itself!

          Peace... Sridhar
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.