Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...]
ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk
Sat Oct 23 15:03:59 CDT 2010
> >  As I understand it, if you acqure an HP 9826 computer system with a
> > printer and a plotter, you might label them :
> > 2010.53.001 (Processor unit)
> > 2010.53.002 (Printer)
> > 2010.53.003 (Plotter)
> > Maybe then 2010.53.001A (RS222 interface card in the processor unit),
> > 2010.53.001B (parallel interface card in the processor unt), 2010.53.003A
> > (HPIB interface PCB in the plotter).
> > But what then do yoy do about an optional firmware ROM on the RS232
> > interface?
Sure, but that's then 4 levels. I ahve no problem extending the
heirarchical system to as many levels as are necessary, my query is why
it's noramlly limitied to 3. Why not just have as many levels as are needed.
And why recorsd the year of acquisition? What importance is that? Why not
just a number for each artefact starting at 1?
> > But what i don't 'get' is why a stock machine is somehow 'special'
> > becuase it was used for a particular task, when any other machine off the
> > same production line would have done just as well.
> Such as Hilton and Burr's dueling pistols?
> The Hasselblad that went to the moon?
Is there anything particularly special about either of those?
In the case of the 'blad was it modified in any way? Say different
lubricants to operate in a vacuum? Or modified controls so it could be
operated by gloved hands? Or??? If so, then it becomes interesting
because of the modifications. But a stock item is, to me, just that, no
matter what it was once used for.
> Your primary interest is the technology.
> There are OTHER people where the primary interest might only be the
I don;t see why those are mutually exclusive.
> Somewhere, there might even be somebody who would treasure the first clone
> that Dell assembled. Dude! You're getting a POS.
PERQ Operting System? I already have it. (Sorry, could NOT resist...)
> > > catalogued when they come in, but boards installed in larger items only
> > > get catalogued when they are pulled for repair or replacement.
> > Hmm.. I don't think I am terribly happy about that. I would want to open
> > up every machine as it was being catalogued and recurd all the intenral
> > PCBs, what options are installed, and so on.
> Howzbout the date codes of each chip?
Only if chips of different dats codes somehow affected the operation of
The point is that I can think of countless examples where machines look
identical from the outside but are quite differnet inside.
Does that 'PRRQ 1' have a 4K or 16K WCS processor?
Does that HP9836C have a CPU/RAM board or a CPU/MMU board?
What SPCs are i ntaht PDP11/34?
Does that IBM 5150 have a 16K/64K Planar or a 64K/256K one?
> The depth of cataloging would depend on the subjective issue of just how
> interesting/important that item is.
How can you possibly know how interesting/importantsomethign will later
turn out to be?
More information about the cctalk