Using machines as they were vs. with modern "upgrades"

[AlsoYes]

In the course of collecting and using my old machines, I've seen lots of accessories using current technology to "upgrade" them. As I'm sure you tell by my use of quotation marks, I try to use machines as was possible during it's heyday, either with upgrades available in it's era or with a modern recreation of something which existed back then. For example, I have a TF534 68030 accelerator in my Amiga 500 as it's close not too far off from the 020 accelerators available in the early 90s. However, I would never consider using something where a Raspberry Pi or an FPGA gives it the computer abilities which weren't imaginable 30 years ago.

When I do use modern creations, it's generally only to facilitate the use of the older tech. I use a greaseweasel, zoomfloppy and ADTPro to transfer software from a modern PC to floppies and I have my C128's dial-up modem connected to a VOIP line (I love my cable modem. It supports 14.4kbps fax, pulse dialing and it can ring up to three Western Electric ringers (albeit at 30 cycles instead of 20))

I do embrace modern software. I've definitely spent time using Contiki to experience the internet in 80 columns and 16 colors, but also at 2400 baud.

Who else here is a stickler for authenticity like me? Who here embraces modern enhancements? I intend absolutely no judgement against anyone. I'm eager to hear other's take on the subject!

 

[Chuck(G)]

I don't long for the old days. Using vintage hardware, one begins to appreciate how much time was lost waiting.
If I were to use "authentic" equipment from my earlier years, it would be punched cards and line printers--and then waiting for a job to complete. My time is worth more than that today.

If you want an "authentic" experience, try browsing the web using any system (vintage or modern) and a Teletype.

 

[syzygy]

*sigh*

I did not vote because the forced choice format is distinctly underwhelming. I did read your profile/hello message and I think you do want to see some discussion and, so, I'll play.

As usual, if not always, it depends...on what you want to do. Many times, you may not know exactly what you want to do. Many of "us" are old farts, and in my case, I finally, have the time to do what I want to do, regardless of what anyone else thinks, says or does - I never tire of saying that.

I agree with @Chuck(G) in that I also don't long for the old days. Frankly, I would be a bit worried if I did because it would boil down to wanting something that is not impossible.

I have only a very few vintage computers. A KIM-1 that works and was the first computer that I owned and I learned 6502 on that computer. If it broke (say a bad ram chip), I would likely replace it with a period-appropriate chip. I'm not sure how easy it would be to replace other chips in that manner, even though it is a relatively simple board.

I am in the process of reviving a TRS-80 M1 (actually I have two). I spent many hours using that machine. I want it to live again, in part because I want to re-experience a part of my personal history. I would not hesitate to use whatever I can get to breathe life into it again. For example, the screw posts have disintegrated, as was common, I bought 3D-printed replacements and I was ecstatic that I found a guy who would print them on-demand and very economically. They will be thankfully used. There is a particular palm mark that formed on any well-used M1 case - I would never refinish that, even if I could.

I am also in the process of reviving a Swan XT, I owned one - my first PC-compatible and I used it for 100s of hours. They are ubiquitous and not particularly expensive. I have archived many disks of programs, some of the programs I wrote many years ago. I want them to run again. I also built a few hardware projects and I want those to come alive again - in their natural environment. When I got the guts of the machine, it had an ST-225. It did not work and I tried every reasonable action to revive it. It could be the drive or the controller or both. I decided it was done. These drives did not last forever, especially when they were likely used a lot and shipped around. I did not even consider buying another. Instead, I bought a modern IDE card that takes a CF card (cheaper than a working ST225 + controller). For a few bucks, I have a handful of CF cards, each of which has, at least 3X the storage capacity of the ST-225. Back ups, using a modern computer are a breeze. Do you remember trying to back up your old ST-225? I do and it was not fun. Although I cobbled together a video circuit so I can use the machine, I see some kind of legitimate upscaler/converter in my future, because I simply can't justify paying more for a CGA monitor (that has an unknown amount of time left) than for the entire machine.

When my friends ask me why I am doing this, my usual response is "because I can". Then I ask them what they are doing.

When my friends ask me what I will do with them when they are finished, I say, I don't know...use it...play with it...sell it...give it away...or something else. Why do you ask?

I would add two other points. First, the activity is very challenging and involves re-learning and learning. For example, I know more about video now than I ever did (not that I am an expert). I find that learning is almost always enjoyable.

Second, each of our stories has some historical significance because it represents actual use cases. After a few generations, much of that information is lost and it is up to, only the best, documentary creators to uncover the information. I will not opine as to the value of this, but I do think (hope) there is some significance.

So, that's my story and I am sticking with it

 

[3lectr1c]

I typically just like to max out my computers with whatever they could "officially" take (with some exceptions. For instance, if a laptop officially supported 512MB of RAM but then later on higher capacity modules came out that could bring it to 1GB, I'd do that). The only real exception I have is period-correct mods, solid state storage, and anything else it takes to keep them running reliably (like a modern ATX PSU in place of an unreliable failed original proprietary one).
Even still, I'm not a super big fan of major processor upgrades, like the Amiga and Macintosh ones. Sure, putting a PowerPC 603e into my PowerBook 540c (68040 from the factory) is fun and all, but really I feel like it turns it into something different from what they were. It's like a brain transplant. Typically, I get out my 540c because I want to use an '040, and I get out my 5300 or 1400 if I want a PowerPC chip.
Still, my main issue with those is just how absurdly expensive they are. I'll bet I'd have a bunch of them if they were cheap.

 

[jafir]

I like having some computers that are “original” but many others that are upgraded to be more usable. While networking certainly existed in the days of the XT and AT it probably wasn’t very popular unless you worked for a big rich corporation, government, university, or something like that. For PCs without 3.5” floppies, I like being able to FTP disk images to my 5170 and write a 5 1/4” floppy that way.

 

[jlang]

I didn't vote because you left out the choice I mostly use.
Period correct hardware and software with modern mass storage.

The CPU, memory and IO boards have held up pretty well. The mass storage not so much.
Belts, pulleys, bearings and media all eventually fail and can be very difficult to source replacements.
I like PDP-11 stuff. Even if I could get RL02 drives i wouldn't run them. Sadly too little life left in them.

joe

 

[krebizfan]

I have modern mass storage and (with PC compatibles) video cards manufactured considerably after the system. Both are relatively cheap while keeping the system usable. I used the system as originally purchased; I don't need to repeat the experience 40 years later.

 

[SpidersWeb]

Generally I do my best to be time period correct - I pick a date (which may be when the machine was new or say 5 years later), and the type of user, then build/setup the machine like that.
When I flick the switch I like that machine to represent a moment in time or a story. But that's just my personal thing - different strokes for different folks.

I am still running time period correct storage in every system except my test bench PC, and I use a flashed Gotek + XT-CF for new builds/installs to kick start things.
No doubt I'll have to give up on spinning rust too at some point.

 

[dorje]

Hi,
As long as my mobo and its case is genuine this is fine for me. So this may look like an heresy, but my two oldie PCs have a XT-IDE/CF and a Gotek, no spinning HD.
This make them more silent and non dependant onto failing medias, except maybe going bad CF cards and USB keys.
I have a few 3,5 floppy drives (some 5,25 would be welcome), just in case I get some floppies of interest, but none installed into the cases.
I welcome modern software and drivers when I see fit, but like plain old applications and dev tools. This is still a work in progress.

 

[Trixter]

I use my machines as if I am still using them -- because I am, I never stopped using them. Meaning, it is appropriate to replace a hard drive with an XT-IDE, because if that option were available to me 35 years ago, I would have also done it.

What I don't do are upgrades that don't make sense for the system. For example, there is a gentleman here who has "upgraded" his XT to a 486 by using an Intel Inboard 386 with a 386-to-486 upgrade and swapping out the crystal for a faster one. People did not do that during the XT's original time period, so neither do I. It's anachronistic.

 

[AndyO]

I don't see the validity of the original question, because it isn't really about the 'vintage computer' to me, so much as what purpose owning it serves.

I am not a museum, so I have no sense of responsibility to keep an old computer in stock condition. I own the devices and systems I do because I use them for something, so to me, I will take whatever steps I need to in order that whatever computer it is can be put to whichever use I have for it.

An example would be a PowerBook 170, which I use for a variety of offline computing tasks. I'll run appropriate software on it for the purpose, which means whatever applications were current at the time which I feel might be productive, but also replace the hard drive with a BlueSCSI modern storage option, and use an external SCSI2SD to move software or data on or off it.

I have a Tandy 200 which is in use every day, and into which I have installed two modern-designed 24K RAM banks - they're much lower power consumption than the originals - and a 'DIAL-A-ROM', which offers multiple option ROMs in a single chip. These facilitate the system's use.

Personally, I'm not interested in accelerators or processor upgrades - I can't see the point in these today, since in many cases the same thing can be accommodated simply by buying a later model system - but I'd think the same regardless of whether it was a period-appropriate upgrade or a modern-build one.

I think it's fair game to use something like the 'reloaded' boards available for some systems such as the SE/30, since these help keep an old piece of equipment in serviceable use, but since to my mind, the very benefit of putting old technologies to modern day use is that they lack the sophistication and complexity which (to me) inhibit productive use of systems, my intention is to do whatever it takes to keep older systems in active use. I don't think there's a good or bad, or right or wrong way to accomplish this.

 

[Timo W.]

For example, I have a TF534 68030 accelerator in my Amiga 500 as it's close not too far off from the 020 accelerators available in the early 90s. However, I would never consider using something where a Raspberry Pi or an FPGA gives it the computer abilities which weren't imaginable 30 years ago.

I don't see where you would put the red line here. Because in that case, replacing a bad SID chip in a C64 with e.g. an ARMSID would fall into the same category: A tiny RISC CPU doing what the SID does was not imaginable when the C64 was made. Do you have a CF card connected to the TF534? Again, same category.

I normally don't do many modern upgrades, but I have no issue with upgrades that fit where an upgrade back then would have fitted as well. The technology an upgrade is using does not really matter.

 

[mbliss11]

Just about every one of my systems has a gotek or some form of modern storage solution. I do not collect physical media and these modern solutions make using the machines easier. I’ll dabble with some modern upgrades (such as pistorm and Orpheus sound card or wifi solution for c64) but mostly revert back to period stock hardware after seeing what it can do. I’ll max out ram and any other upgrade from that time if available which are generally needed for newer demos and games.

 

[mojorific]

For me, I think I just want the ability to use the software on original hardware. I think upgrading it (either via accelerators, compact flash cards, virtual serial modems, etc.) just make it easier to experience everything the hardware had to offer.

I do also like the fact that you can max out a vintage computer, as that is something I think every kid who owned it back in the day dreamt about having a hard drive card, or accelerator, or that super expensive component that they could only look at in magazines.

For emulation, I would love to get my hands on MiSTer some time in the future. I also like putting together my own boards for vintage pc's (XT-IDE and Adlib cards). I also recently got a vintage Macintosh 128, and the first think I did was put in a blueSCSI hard drive card (equivalent to an XT-IDE in a PC) and fill it with every sort of game I could find for it. I think I just wanted to understand what was so great about having that hardware, and what it was capable of doing.

I also really enjoy the look of games on old monitors. You can obviously emulate that with filters on modern hardware, but its just not the same as looking through the glass of a CRT with all the pixellation and distortion of a non-flat screen.

Vintage computing can be whatever you want it to be really. Max it out. Overclock it. Modify it to work with modern components. Vintage computing is all about time travel for me - re-living a memory or a feeling.

 

[NeXT]

I use enhancements and accelerators, if I own them already.
I have no intention paying even half the price for most new market upgrades these days, which in some cases can cost more than the computer itself.

 

[krebizfan]

There are some upgrades I won't do like many replacement processors since those often cost a lot and sometimes break compatibility with period software. If I need a certain speed of system, I can tweak another system into providing the correct performance.

My theory for vintage hardware is have fun, try not to break anything.

 

[Abmvk]

I love modern computers with the freedom and thrill I remember, but with modern possibilities, so I have a couple of Raspberry Pies.

I enjoy some reliving of my youth, so I have most computers I ever worked with (AS/400 still missing) as they were back then. I just wouldn’t have the joy I have when I would upgrade my TRS-80, FX-720, ST and so on. Why would I? All I want to do that goes beyond the capabilities of those machines I can do with a Raspbery Pi or my MacBook

 

[cajunc2]

I generally try to keep things as period-correct as possible, but there are places where I'll "stretch it" a bit. Sometimes it's easier/cheaper/more accessible to use something that's not completely authentic and I don't generally have a problem with that. For example, in a PC, I might use a budget video card that's a couple of years newer than appropriate because it's easier to find, cheaper, and gives similar performance to an age-appropriate top-of-the-line card. I'll generally also go for more modern peripherals as well, like modern mechanical keyboards and optical mice, unless there's something particularly unique about a given system.

 

[AlsoYes]

After reading some of your replies, I realized that the poll's topic is inherently biased, even if I didn't intend for it to be. I apologize for the poll's question being prejudicial of people here who like to "max out" their machines. All that matters of course is that you enjoy it and have fun!

 

[digger]

Indeed, this is a subjective topic. Personally, I am fascinated by the concept of making old technology interoperate with new technology. There is just something cool about the idea of taking away bottlenecks that existed at the time in a way that was perhaps not possible back then, and then see what the old systems were capable of at their theoretical maximum. An extreme example of connecting the old with the new is a nearly century-old teletype being used as a Linux terminal.

Or, perhaps a bit more controversially, allowing a modern western missile to be launched from an old soviet aircraft.

So yeah, booting a PC/XT from an SSD drive, or somehow being able to use USB peripherals in a vintage system, or connecting a dumb terminal to the internet through a wifi dongle that emulates a modem and bridges RS-232 with Telnet (or perhaps even SSH), that's all incredibly cool to me!

The one thing that does sometimes make this feel a little bit like "cheating" to me is when such modern "adapters" end up containing more integrated processing power than the retro machines that they are supposed to be mere peripherals or add-ons for. For instance, an ISA card with a Raspberry Pi Pico that could run circles around the 8088 or even 386 machine that it's installed in, and could completely emulate the host system in software, without breaking a sweat. But hey, you can't have it all.

Of course, a secondary argument for this is to make retro hardware more convenient to use, taking away the more tedious and unpleasant stuff that our rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia tend to filter out when we fondly remember our old computing days.

At the same time, I absolutely understand other people who prefer to maintain their beloved retro/vintage hardware in a period-correct configuration, and I believe that is also important from a historical perspective.

One argument in favor of integrating more modern solutions in retro hardware would be to preserve its longevity. For example, replacing old leaky capacitors with polymer capacitors that would never leak, using more reliable PSUs to better protect the precious no-longer-produced on-board logic chips from overcurrent and spikes, or swapping out corrosive batteries for safer and more durable alternative battery types.

There's ample room for all these preferences and opinions in the retro computing scene.