Anybody like old computers???

[supermaticjames]

Evening all,

I know there are people out there who collect old computers like we collect washing machines and vacuum cleaners, although I'm not one of them, I do have a small interest in old computers. I wouldn't want to use one as I like fast computers and it's the way to go, old printers I can deal with. I just recently found my Aunt's old 1997 HP LaserJet 6L which I fondly remembered whirring and humming in my childhood years. I wanted it as my HP inkjet consumes an alarming amount of ink and I can save alot of black ink and money with it.

Didn't take much to get it working with my Windows 7 desktop. I needed to buy a USB to Parallel cable though. It's a great little printer and I'm glad I saved it.
It doesn't look out of place either.

James.

 

[lordkenmore]

I have some interest in old computers, and I suppose in a sense I collected them for a time. But--and this is a big but--it's not so much to have a museum or conversation pieces as it is for machines to use. Most of the computers I have are old Macintosh computers. I started using a Macintosh, and, until fairly recently, still used them for a lot of "real work." The software worked better for some things than my modern system. I might have gotten something new that would be as good for me--but my modern system is entirely based on software that is free--often in both senses (freedom, and $0).

Old computers aren't necessarily slow. The trick is getting software that is appropriate for the machine. This software can limit one's activities. One can often forget about the Internet (at least the modern Internet), for example. But I have never felt that my early 90s Macintosh Quadra (running System 7.5) is particularly slow for word processing, data management, spreadsheets, etc. Actually, I once tried to compile a long document on a modern system that had OpenOffice.org. The modern system was pretty marginal, but still they always say you word processing is fine on marginal systems. OpenOffice.org began struggling after the document started getting long. (It ended up many hundreds of pages, if not over 1,000). I finally gave up, and thought I'd try the project on my Mac. I bumped it over to WriteNow (early 1990s word processor), and the pace picked up considerably. WriteNow became cranky later on, but quitting, bumping the memory allocation up, and restarting fixed that.

These days, I'm using my "modern" system for most tasks. Partly because often I need the Internet handy for some tasks. Plus software evolves, and I'm finding new solutions that work at least part of the time for me.

All my printers are older models. My best Mac printer is a "Personal LaserWriter" that has very clean, sharp printing. It's probably an early 90s printer. (On that machine, I have to use old, because it's been years since anything new directly supported that machine.)

I've also used only older printers with my modern computer. They are cheap, and do what I need them to do. I think they are better built than today's printers--certainly better than modern cheap printers. The only advantage I see to new printers is often speed (which may or may not be a plus, depending on what one does), and color (which I would "sort of like", but can live without.)

 

[lordkenmore]

Another thought: some argue that older systems for some tasks are actually faster than the modern equivalent. One possible reason: once resources were limited, and software writers were forced to be efficient. Now companies often seem to take an arrogant view "they can just upgrade to run this!" attitude.

Here's one comparison of old computer vs. new for word processing. It's a few years old--I'm not sure what would happen in today's multi-core world. Still, it's interesting.

http://lowendmac.com/sable/06/0706.html

 

[lordkenmore]

An interesting video that compares the booting speed of a Macintosh (the ORIGINAL Macintosh) with a 2007 Windows system.