Slashdot Mirror


Fun and Profit With Obsolete Computers

An anonymous reader writes "C|Net has a story about the value of aging computer hardware, and the subculture of people who collect them. The story details some of the more enthusiastic collectors currently participating in the hobby, as well as their old-school beautiful hardware. '[Sellam Ismail] recently brought a quarter century-old Xerox Star computer back to life to be used as evidence in a patent lawsuit. The pride of his collection is an Apple Lisa, one of the first computers (introduced in 1983) with a now standard graphical interface. Such items sell for more than $10,000. In an old barn in Northern California that also houses pigs, Bruce Damer, 45, keeps a collection that includes a Cray-1 supercomputer, a Xerox Alto (an early microcomputer introduced in 1973) and early Apple prototypes. '

7 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. classiccmp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No article such as this is complete without a link straight to the Classic Computer Mailing List, with its high volume of discussions, finds, swaps and technical solutions.

    A couple of years ago I was involved in the dissemination of a collection in the south-east of England. From the PDP-11/43 that had people offering to drive over from northern Europe, to the blue Intel MDS to Spain, the old Dragon to America, the stalwart CJE Micros grabbing up the BBC's Torch coprocessor, to the steady stream of people each collecting a VAX, it was amazing to see the interest and enthusiasm.

    Three nice things about old machines:
    (1) Simple enough that a single human can understand how they work;
    (2) Scaled such that this same human can fix problems in his garage;
    (3) Sufficiently well built that (2) can sometimes be unnecessary even after 20 years.

  2. For Our Retirement by Ray+Radlein · · Score: 5, Funny
    That's what I keep telling my wife -- all those old Amigas are an investment.

    Plus, Lemmings looks surprisingly good on the big TV in the living room.

  3. Creepy by stewbacca · · Score: 5, Funny
    So THAT'S what the creepy math teacher at my school does with all those old computer parts he hoardes.

    Frankly, I don't get the collector (cough, mental illness hoarding, cough) mentality. I suppose I'll sit back and watch this thread for awhile and feed my 30 cats.

  4. Best for learning programming by iamacat · · Score: 5, Insightful
    An original IBM PC would be perfect for teaching someone advanced programming.

    • Interrupt handling - Check
    • Instruction timing-based optimization - Check
    • Drawing lines by directly altering video memory - Check
    • Disk and memory data structures - Check

      On a modern computer, everything is wrapped into so many of abstraction that you can not discover how it works. It will take someone 3 years of experience to create a device driver or a graphics library that can be understood in 3 weeks on an old PC.
    1. Re:Best for learning programming by romiz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      To learn system programming, it is a bad deal compared to a microcontroller with an emulator, or even a refurbished GBA with a flash card:

      • Interrupt handling - Check
        With only 15 interrupts lines, cascaded into 2 8-lines banks, the IBM PC is quite limited, and you still have the trouble to handle the cascaded handlers.
      • Instruction timing-based optimization - Check
        But if the 8086 processor understands a subset of the complete assembly language from the current PC, the timings constraints are completely different: the cost of an instruction for a 8086 accessing directly the main memory completely changes as soon as you have cache, which is essential for modern computers. And with the mess that x86 assembly is, I'd prefer dabbling with ARM assembly instead.
      • Drawing lines by directly altering video memory - Check
        OK - but it is not alone on that segment.
      • Disk and memory data structures - Check
        Disk structures ? The cylinder/head/track abstraction that come with the floppy disks is compulsory on old IBM PCs. The LBA method is much more straightforward. No one should need to learn a complex, obsolete abstraction that doesn't even correspond to the reality anymore.
      • And in complement to that, it is impossible to debug from the outside. With embedded platforms, you can write the code with your PC, test it in an simulator, and then test it on the platform with an In-Circuit Emulator to check for bugs. You can't do that on an old IBM PC.
    2. Re:Best for learning programming by TheMoog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In the computer games industry it still pays to know your way around cycle counts, pipelines and caches. Just because your device has a cache, and you're coding mainly in an OO language, doesn't mean to say you've left the world of cycle-level optimisation behind. And particularly on Sony machine it's almost a requirement to fully understand the various hardware interactions in order to get a decent turn of speed out of it.

      As an industry we're now finding it very hard to employ people who know this kind of stuff. Most graduates are taught Java or C++ and have no decent experience at the assembler or hardware level. Now I'm not saying that we spend all day hand-crafting assembly code - games are just far too big nowadays - but every now and then you'll get an unusual crash which can only be debugged using knowledge of the hardware. In my experience CS graduates just freak out when you show them a disassembly of their code!

  5. Re:Oldies by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 5, Informative

    In another 30 years, many of these oldies will have died (if they haven't already) due to a variety of reasons. Mostly plain mechanical parts (cheap plastic, foil keyboard switches, rubber rolls crumbling and so on). Also think of programmed parts (EPROMs, programmable microcontrollers included for a specific task etc) that go into an erased state after a long, but finite time (usually several decades).

    But if your machine still works after 30 years, plugging it into a monitor won't be the hard part. Last time I checked, even many of the latest LCD TV's have a variety of analog inputs. Why? Because analog inputs are often useful to hook up monitors to the widest possible variety of replay equipment. Even if many modern equipment is 'digitised', you're a fool to think that the option to display analog signals will disappear completely. Think of analog signals in general as a lower-level thing than most digital signals, meaning it's easier to do something with it, and easy to include in display equipment at near-zero added cost.
    With audio, things are even easier/simpler.

    For example this Sinclair ZX81 produces a TV UHF signal, but it's easy to pick up a plain composite video signal from its insides. Some soldering of wires might be required, but I expect you'll have a hard time finding a brandnew LCD TV that is not capable of producing an image with that.

    One thing I personally like about these early Sinclair machines, is that they're built simple enough to recreate them with plain discrete logic, and perhaps a few analog parts. No complex video circuitry, no audio, a well-understood CPU and so on. Enough for instance to program a FPGA to behave like a ZX81 (try Google if you're interested). Also makes these machines relatively easy to repair. For ZX81: if you got the time, tools and knowledge, you can repair/keep these machines running as long as you want. I myself own 2 of these, last time I checked both were still working. 25 years old by now, and I'm pretty sure I can have these in a working state longer than a PC bought new today.