Age cutoff, was: Recommendations for operating system

[Cameron Kaiser]

> > > 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."
> 
> Speaking of which, that gave me an idea .... How about we in the
> anti-10-year camp compromise by adding this clause to the definition of
> what's classic: "IF it's post-1981 (when IBM launched the PC), THEN it must
> have been unique when it was new."  That way you include all the
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> first-of-breed stuff (i.e., the PS/2), you include all the exceptions to the
> mainstream (i.e., the iMac), and you exclude all the same old PC crap.

But what does 'unique' mean? Different CPU? Different case? Different
architecture? And how much difference constitutes 'different'?

I think something like this has the same drawbacks as the 'coolness'
exemption.

-- 
--------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ ---
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- If the dictionary misspells a word, how would you know? -- Steven Wright ---