Age cutoff, was: Recommendations for operating system

[Sean Conner]

It was thus said that the Great Cameron Kaiser once stated:
> > > So how about, "If it's a computing device of some sort that isn't made
> > > anymore, nor is there any commercial support to be had for it. Oh, and if
> > > the computing device is capable of running Windows 95 or better, it's still
> > > off topic."
> > 
> > That would still exclude many 386s, for one. Even 2K could theoretically run
> > on a P133, although that would be clinical evidence of masochism, I think.

  I said "capable," not "theoretically possible." 8-P

> > XP wants a 233MHz Pentium-type CPU minimum. I think that would be a more
> > reasonable cutoff, if we want a particular Windows version to be the cutoff.
> 
> Hit send too fast, there was one other thing I wanted to add: commercial
> support is a pretty wide term. Even a IIgs is still "supported" by Apple
> insofar as there are tech notes and downloadable software still up on the
> website for it, despite the fact that their service department would get a
> good chuckle if you ever dropped by asking for a new motherboard. And there
> are still companies making hardware for the Commodore 64 in small quantities,
> which is still "commercial support" of a sort.

  I waivered a bit about adding a year-based clause to the commercial
support ("... nor is there any commercial support to be had for it, or it's
older than 10-15 years old") but thought simpler would be better.  But on
the other hand, do the tech notes and software cost anything to download?

> I think using a Windows-based boundary will be firmer and less ambiguous.

  I agree, and that seems to be the most contentious part of this whole
definition of a "classic computer."

  -spc