On Nov 8, 2015 7:41 PM, "Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic" < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On 11/08/2015 07:39 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Those who argue the 1802 "was a loser so forgetit" might explain why a computing museum should show only "the winners", and set a dollar or production count for "winning".
I agree 100%. Is anyone really stupid enough to say something like
that about any chip, processor or otherwise, in constant production for 39 years (1976-present) with no plans for discontinuance?
Nobody said anything like that.
Of course not, and I made no such claim, nor did Herb. If anyone does in the future, though, feel free to refer them to me so I can beat them over the head with the numbers.
-Dave
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
Can't have everything, but even if this is not chosen you make a good case as to whether the 1802 is important historically. I think "looks" has to taken into account for an exhibit selection too, the nod would go to something in the top 40 "qualifying" machines that typical visitors would find interesting. Impossible cover everything. I look forward to seeing it all in the new location. Bill