• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Hard Drive in a 5150 - Cheating?

Well I would say to that, your using the wrong versions of the software if they won't fit on a 360KB disk.

As for the hard drives, yes that will happen someday, but I don't think it will happen for some time, I have an extra ST-412 sitting around just for that reason, But someday I will have to retrofit an IDE drive in an 5161. When I am old and in my late 40's maybe! ;-)

My reason for updating the floppies is that it is a total pain in the arse to try to get programs such as DBase or Lotus 123 loaded onto a hard drive with only 360k floppies. Most of the software I find is not available on anything less than 1.2MB floppies.
2 of my XT's came with dead 10MB Seagate HDD's. Because I can't find a working 10MB drive, my second choice for replacement would be something like a 20 MB ST-225. MFM drives have been out of production for many years now and the ones out there are failing. People are starting to look for alternatives to keep their machines running. I'm sure we have all seen the ongoing project to develop an 8-bit IDE card and there seems to be a lot of interest in it. Can you see the day coming that you would put an IDE drive in your machine because there are no other alternatives?

As I stated in the last sentence of my 1st post, I still have all of the original boards that came with the computers. I can restore them to their original configuration. I get the impression that some collectors think I took a hacksaw to the units and butchered them. Not so.

The computers in my collection are not set up to seriously use spreadsheets or databases or any software. Exceptions would be for running OS/2 on some of my IBM PS/2's. My main concern is to keep them in good working order with software that people would have used on them back in the day.
 
I don't understand the reason for the debate ...

If you are a collector, ...etc.
....
Every classic computer mailing list/forum seems to discuss this topic several times a year and come to the same conclusion - it depends on the individual. And so, here we are again ...

Mike, I think there is another dimension to the debate, which you didn't consider with your post above. Consider this question. If you were going to exibit a 5150 or a 5160 to groups of people (or even just individuals) as an example of an historically-interesting machine, what configuration should it be to fit the type-example?

I think that's an interesting point to discuss. What is a "typical" unit? That might depend on lots of things such as when it was released in a particular country, when was the major marketing push, etc.

So it's more than just (stamp-type) collectors and users. Given my particular interests like to know what people feel are the "defining" or " typical" configurations of these machines.

Tez
 
Mike, I think there is another dimension to the debate, which you didn't consider with your post above. Consider this question. If you were going to exibit a 5150 or a 5160 to groups of people (or even just individuals) as an example of an historically-interesting machine, what configuration should it be to fit the type-example?

I think that's an interesting point to discuss. What is a "typical" unit? That might depend on lots of things such as when it was released in a particular country, when was the major marketing push, etc.

So it's more than just (stamp-type) collectors and users. Given my particular interests like to know what people feel are the "defining" or " typical" configurations of these machines.

Tez


After 10 years of collecting and hearing this debate, it gets old really quick. It's not even a debate, it's just people spouting opinions on personal preference.

If you frame the question as "What is more appropriate to show?" that it just a matter of personal preference too. A museum will show a stock machine, because that is what was accurate. A more 'interpretive' museum will define the stock machine, and then show what people did to it.

Either way, 'it depends' and there is no right answer. And I'm sure it will come up again and again and again ...
 
Yes, I believe that everyone should have two of everything; one to remain in original configuration, and another to max-out. This isn't always practical tho, and due to space limitations, even I had to choose one or the other with most of my larger machines, although I do regret some of the decisions I made in that regard.

--T
 
At risk of continuing to annoy Mike, my dad collects stamps, for reasons I will probably never understand, much like he has no idea my living room seems to have several more computers than a normal person should actually need. But I like to sample the past on a rainy day, not live in it.

I like going through the rituals of IBM PC operation, and the inconvenience of plugging in floppies and working around those limitations is part of the charm.
 
Mike won't be annoyed. Mike will just stop worrying about it and move on now that Mike's point has been made. ;-0

Stamp collecting was brought up as a hobby where you collect something, but you dare not use it. Nothing more. My mother collected stamps years ago too, and the internation ones can be fascinating. As for PCs, yes, I agree - the crudeness of the technology is part of the charm.
 
Mike it's a bit grouchy anyway, and easily get's annoyed but I think we all still like him, but that's why this form is here for folks to talk there minds!

Anyway Paul I totaly agree, 100% why collect vintage computers if you want to upgrade them with newer parts the fun of the whole thing is doing all that! Using it as it was back in 1983 or ect?



I like going through the rituals of IBM PC operation, and the inconvenience of plugging in floppies and working around those limitations is part of the charm.
 
mbbrutman: A museum will show a stock machine, because that is what was accurate. A more 'interpretive' museum will define the stock machine, and then show what people did to it.
Thanks Mike. I was wondering when someone would get around to putting their finger on the core of a lot of "arguments" here. :) The history of an industry is interesting but so is the history of a socity. Both are good, although they likely appeal to different people even though they interact.

Personally I feel that museums give short thrift to "what people did" with computers. I would like to see more along the line of a pile of parts, and a motherboard operated flat on the table without a box etc, That is how I remember it back then and I think that history is worth preserving too. In fact I think that history is in danger of being lost.
 
Thanks Mike. I was wondering when someone would get around to putting their finger on the core of a lot of "arguments" here. :)

Ah! Finally somebody who understands the meaning of my rant and is brave enough to post! We must have a beer sometime ..

The history of an industry is interesting but so is the history of a socity. Both are good, although they likely appeal to different people even though they interact.

Personally I feel that museums give short thrift to "what people did" with computers. I would like to see more along the line of a pile of parts, and a motherboard operated flat on the table without a box etc, That is how I remember it back then and I think that history is worth preserving too. In fact I think that history is in danger of being lost.

Agreed - if I might expand on the thought ...


It is very easy to give the technology a 'clinical' treatment and describe it in absolutely accurate but sterile terms that bores the tears out of most people.

Let me give a good example here. The most interesting example of a machine isn't the pristine still-in-the-original box model that nobody got any use out of. The most interesting example of a machine is a machine that had the snot beat out of it. A machine that was heavily modified, not to turn it into something that it wasn't supposed to be, but to make it more useful to the people who used it. A machine with no marks on it is sad because it didn't get used.

A PCjr with a homebrew hack to add a 2nd hard drive is far more interesting than a stock machine because besides the machine, you get to see the handi-work of the hack and you get an insight into how desperate the owner was to make the machine more usable. Somebody willing to lift a soldering iron to a $1000 plus machine is somebody who is seriously committed to the machine.

To be historically accurate, the stock machine is a must. But to tell the story, you can't do it in a vacuum and forget the whole aspect of how the machines were used and what they enabled people to do.
 
My parents used to collect stamps too, but we always used 'em. Gold Bell Gift Stamps, Top Value, S&H Green Stamps. After you collected enough of 'em, you could trade 'em in for kewl stuff, like transistor radios, fishing rods, cheap Timex watches, etc. We used to always fill up the ol' Buick on Wednesday, cause that was 'Double Stamp Day'. Where people shopped was often determined by what flavor of stamps they gave, as most folks only collected a certain kind...whatever happened to stamps? Or coupons on cigarette packs, or...

/trip down nostalgia lane

--T
 
To be historically accurate, the stock machine is a must. But to tell the story, you can't do it in a vacuum and forget the whole aspect of how the machines were used and what they enabled people to do.

Sure! No arguments with that point of view.

For me, the most interesting thing about these machines IS the way they impacted on society, lead to innovations etc. But you do often need a stock machine to start with.

A computer in isolation is just a collection of wires and plastic. Its the stories that surround it that are most interesting.

Tez
 
I guess as an industrial product mechanical engineer by profession I appreciate more a machine presented in "stock" configuration, as I can try and visualize the thinking put into it by the designers at the time. Even the screws IBM chose for the enclosure are interesting.

I don't often see user-designed mods that I would consider well-engineered but I can appreciate the thought behind third-party components as they were intended to fill a perceived gap in the market at the time.

A vintage machine doesn't have to be in pristine condition, but I can imagine what it would be like being thoroughly "used" without it actually being presented in beat up condition. Sort of like keeping the original paint job on a old car, the texture and quality of the factory finish can tell a few stories of what was acceptable at the time.
 
Paul's view is interesting and a very valid one. The history and evolution of computer engineering is interesting. I also appreciate industrial design as an artform and an important mirror of our society. My personal slant however, has always been toward cultural anthropology. How these things interact with society and people's view of their own lives is the juicy part to me. From a "museum" point of view, that ends up being quite a different show. :) The stock "new in the box" tells one story, but the gamer in his mom's basement and a computer with the top off and a couple of outdated video cards beside it, tells another. Although I must admit that the slightly worn IBM clone with some secretarie's stickers on the monitor is also interesting. In fact the exact stickers from the time are very important to the authenticity of the exibit. :)

The computer culture that I have been part of is even more different from the one with the clean proprietary computer. In fact I don't think any of my computer friends have (or have ever had) a propritary computer. We all just put together stuff we find for cheap or free. The computer in our world consists of a number of seperate items, much like a house would. The idea of buying a completely put together computer, complete with someone else's software choices, is foreign to us and would be looked at much like one of those father's day tool sets. :) Just because we're not rich does not mean that we should be forgotten. The point I wish to drive home here, is that this culture (and others) has always been around and is worth documenting as well. There is much more to the history of computers besides just the history of the retail, or corporate, experience.

We've all seen Terry Yager's laptop and I think that will be one for the museum of the future. Another example of what I'm getting at would be the classic gaming machine which I believe should be shown with the empty pizza box (from the period) and a dirty sock.
 
Another example of what I'm getting at would be the classic gaming machine which I believe should be shown with the empty pizza box (from the period) and a dirty sock.

I think that would be more indicative of programmers of the era :)

FWIW, and, as I have stated in the past, I don't collect, so, I represent the mercenary point of view. For me, I supply the "foundation" for whomever purchases the system. It will be stock, no upgrades, authentic down to the date-codes on any chips I've had to replace with no sockets where there weren't any.

They will get the pre-"well, you're going to need a video card with that..." system.

HOWEVER, I will, to the best of my ability, also supply things that were common upgrades to the system so that the choice of what they "build" on the "foundation" is up to them. They buy them or they don't.

I have, for example, several complete TRS-80 Model I one drive systems that I am, slowly, repairing and bring back to specs. Some of them are so heavily modded that they don't even work which means I have to pull out mods, repair traces, fill holes in the cases and get them working again. The exception are Radio Shack authorized mods such as the Lower Case Mod, the Twisted Pair Mod, the XRX-3 Cassette Mod etc., because they are authentic

Now, if someone buys one, then THEY can decide if they are going to run it stock or put every mod I just took out back in again.
 
I would consider a 5150 with a hard drive and larger power supply to be atypical of a 5150, and therefore not qualify.

Tez

I dunno. I see 5150s with hard disks on Ebay frequently, so I wouldn't consider it "atypical".

Everyone has their own opinion on this, but to me an authentic 5150 or XT should not have VGA, sound cards, or DOS 6.22.
 
I see computers as tools. So when I collect systems it is because I have a use for them, and upgrades help out for that use.

For example I collect early video capture cards of the analog era because I like to see 1st hand how they did what they did and how they evolved. You started off with simple still capture cards (like the Supermac Video spigot for the Mac and maybe one of the Nuvista cards for the PC), then early low rez video. Soon you need to connect a compression card to the capture card to overcome the bus limitations. As resolution gets better you have issues with SCSI HDs recalibrating during capture and dropping frames. Sooner or later you want sound and then have the issues of keeping the sound synced to the video so you get external sync generators and connect everything up in timing loops. Then you need software to edit all this stuff. There is all kinds of history involved, that affected PC design along the way and it is fun to play with. Showing a static dsiplay of a computer tells you nothing about what it was used for, its limitations, and what needed to be changed so that the next model worked better.
 
I see computers as tools. So when I collect systems it is because I have a use for them, and upgrades help out for that use.

Weird, when I collect a system, I'm just the opposite. I usually don't have any use for them, other than my own amusement. When I have them, I 'create' uses for them, usually beginning and sometimes even ending with learning as much as I can about them within a reasonable amount of time.

--T
 
I see computers as tools. So when I collect systems it is because I have a use for them, and upgrades help out for that use.

Ahh, now we're getting somewhere. I too see the computer as a tool, and I like to get the most use I can out of the computers I collect. I can even reasonably see upgrading as a viable way to get more use out of a computer. But whenever I upgrade my, say 5150, 5170, or any other vintage computer, I upgrade with parts available at the time or reasonable replacements. I don't believe in putting VGA video in any 808X computer or 286. Those processors aren't strong enough to get any real difference between EGA and VGA. Now 386's and up could come with VGA or VGA was readily available, and they can run programs optimized for VGA.

There are few exceptions to my belief. For instance, if VGA is put in an 8088 5150 for some cool project, such as making a video on the 5150, or to get 256 colors on a 5150 to paint a picture, or just for cool factor, I see no problem. Just the same, if no CGA or MDA monitor is available and VGA is the only viable solution, I'd put VGA in an 808X as it's better than nothing.

Another upgrade I can see reasonable is replacing an MFM drive with an SCSI drive. SCSI is far more reliable, and when you are like me and store VERY IMPORTANT DATA with your vintage computers, you want something reliable to fall back on if your floppy disk is damaged. It happened to me before. My floppy disk I had my important data on was destroyed. So, I figured I'd just load the backup of the files I had put on my MFM HDD the day before. I fired it up and the MFM drive crashed. I never saw that financial report again and had to start anew with a new, better system. But if I were to put SCSI in my vintage computer(I haven't found a good card yet) I'd make it LOOK like MFM. Another plus about SCSI--CD drives. Their not genuinely vintage, but they are still great for opening your vintage machine to huge amounts of information without huge amounts of floppy disks. For instance, the 8GB of DOS games on my HDD would be a pain to put on disks. Just unzip them onto CDs and I could play any game I wanted to without an infinite amount of disks.

Now my post is very long and hard to read. I will stop soon. Point is, I don't think vintage computers should be upgraded much more than what was available in their hey-day, with very few exceptions. It's like taking the 8-track out of a muscle car and replacing it with an MP3 CD player. Blasphemy.

--Jack
 
Back
Top