Well, I have one desktop that's fast but constantly giving hard disk errors, the mobo NIC is shot and the thing is prone to random lockups during network operations.

Next, an old Compaq that's in great condition but even simple internet browsing sometimes brings it to an unbearable crawl. At least it's reliable and in great shape.

Also have a laptop with a busted screen. Thing was on it's last leg anyways but that drop just finally nailed it's casket shut.

Junk, junk, junk!

Of course, there's the Intel DX4 system I had at one point last year... Despite it running Win3.1 and not being able to do a fraction of what any of the above computers can do, it ran like a dream, I liked that thing quite a bit and regret getting rid of it.

It all sort of raises interesting questions. You can keep older computers running practically forever. The question is - can you be happy using older software? Sometimes I think the older software was actually better.

On the other hand - where do you draw the line? How old is too old? I have a friend still using a 90-MHz pentium, a 700-Mb drive, and DOS/Win 3.1. He makes the argument it does everything he needs to do (word processing). But you can't even burn a CD on a system like that!

ncmark wrote:

I have a friend still using a 90-MHz pentium, a 700-Mb drive, and DOS/Win 3.1. He makes the argument it does everything he needs to do (word processing). But you can't even burn a CD on a system like that!

I have. :P

Way back before the turn of the century, at high school, our tech lab there had access to an external 2x speed CD writer which I needed to use so I could store the renders of some very archaic 3D movies I was making. I had actually set it up to work all night long on a 90 MHz system and the teacher had allowed me to put a note on the computer so that no one would disturb it.

First time I ever used a parallel port for something other than a printer. ;D

Also, video codecs SUCKED back then. >_>;

The only systems I see as JUNK are the "name brand" systems. I mean I have a 700mhz p3 laptop sitting right next to me that I use for simple web browsing when I can't alt-tab. (looking up things in minecraft comes to mind.) Ironically, its the same size as the "new" atom powered laptops... and its over 10 years old!

In the past, I've tended to go through cycles of collecting vast amounts of junk and then waking up one day, looking at that bloody mess, and promptly purging it from my life. Whereupon, I restart the junk pile a couple months later only to flush the lot again next year .

Except this year- this year I've decided that old junk is getting harder and harder to randomly find. So now, no more purging- whatever comes into my hands stays with me forever no matter how ugly, shitty or useless it is.

When I think of "Junk".........

I've got a bunch of old hardware that doesn't work - i.e. motherboards with bad components, graphics cards with bad RAM, dead hard drives, etc. Most of which I don't have the spare time to revive. Some of it went into the "free" section on craigslist or the refuse bins in my electronics lab. I did recently pick up a small bunch of SATA cables that were in the refuse bins though - if I can confirm them working I might just sell them or something.

ncmark wrote:

It all sort of raises interesting questions. You can keep older computers running practically forever. The question is - can you be happy using older software? Sometimes I think the older software was actually better.

There's still one person I know of who runs Windoze 95 (might be able to easily guess who) and just tries to squeeze as much as he can out of it. I'd still be using something that old if my projects didn't depend on newer software. I still run IRIX 6.5 on one of my workstations, but it's not that old yet and there's still quite a good amount of usable software that I use that runs on it (however, the last version of firefox that runs on it is version 2 and it's slow as molasses on my machine - netscape is much faster but no one designs in standard HTML anymore - bummer).

ncmark wrote:

I have a friend still using a 90-MHz pentium, a 700-Mb drive, and DOS/Win 3.1. He makes the argument it does everything he needs to do (word processing). But you can't even burn a CD on a system like that!

Actually you can burn a cd on such a machine: just use CDRoast for DOS. Its a 16 bit program, should theoretically work on a 286 ( Will definitely try it someday 😁 )

I think that microsoft has done a very good job of making anything more than 2-3 years old LOOK like junk 😦
The fact of the matter is that the older versions of office could already do 99% of what most people needed. I absolutely HATE the new versions of office.
I still use win98. The only things it's really missing are multiprocessor support and support for mass storage devices. They could have released upaates for these (certainly the latter) but then you wouldn't have to buy a new OS. 😦

They don't force you to upgrade. When new technology comes out, software is released to support it. When programmers find new things to add, new software comes out. However, your old hardware and software can still do what they did when you got them. Also, say what you want but a business must sell new products. Majority customer demand aside, those paychecks they give to their employees aren't just made by magic.

Also, if multiproc shouldn't be a concern under Win 98 as it's not gonna happen.

Do know, however, if you really need a somewhat up to date version of Office and wish to keep with Windows 98, you can install Office XP and then get from the Microsoft site a patch that makes it possible to open and save documents in the Office 2007 format. The fact they are still supporting ten year old software is something they should be complimented for.

ncmark wrote:

On the other hand - where do you draw the line? How old is too old? I have a friend still using a 90-MHz pentium, a 700-Mb drive, and DOS/Win 3.1. He makes the argument it does everything he needs to do (word processing). But you can't even burn a CD on a system like that!

I think you answered it -- too old is when it no longer does what you need it to do. (Or perhaps when it's so slow that it starts wasting your time.)

sgt76 wrote:

In the past, I've tended to go through cycles of collecting vast amounts of junk and then waking up one day, looking at that bloody mess, and promptly purging it from my life. Whereupon, I restart the junk pile a couple months later only to flush the lot again next year .

Except this year- this year I've decided that old junk is getting harder and harder to randomly find. So now, no more purging- whatever comes into my hands stays with me forever no matter how ugly, shitty or useless it is.

I go through tech purges every once in a while too. There are a couple of things that I wish I had kept from the piles, but oh well..

I feel like in the early part of the last decade I was accumulating old computers from everywhere and everyone. It was like a sea of beige. I had way too much stuff sitting around. I don't think anyone has tried to pawn a machine off on me for years, though. Seems like tech has gotten to the point that it's fast enough that people don't need to upgrade as often.

GXL750 wrote:

They don't force you to upgrade. When new technology comes out, software is released to support it. When programmers find new things to add, new software comes out. However, your old hardware and software can still do what they did when you got them. Also, say what you want but a business must sell new products. Majority customer demand aside, those paychecks they give to their employees aren't just made by magic.

Also, if multiproc shouldn't be a concern under Win 98 as it's not gonna happen.

Do know, however, if you really need a somewhat up to date version of Office and wish to keep with Windows 98, you can install Office XP and then get from the Microsoft site a patch that makes it possible to open and save documents in the Office 2007 format. The fact they are still supporting ten year old software is something they should be complimented for.

They don't force you?????? Then why can I not use a new printer without having XP or higher??????? We're only talking about a printer, so they can't say older computers running older operating systems wouldn't be fast enough.

And how long before support for XP disappears? Pretty soon - only works on windows 7.

Why should they write drivers for obsolete OS'? It's costing them money to support OS' that not even the OS developer supports any more. Money better spent on their own income...
If you want new you tend to have to use it with new in the PC area.

ncmark wrote:

GXL750 wrote:

They don't force you to upgrade. When new technology comes out, software is released to support it. When programmers find new things to add, new software comes out. However, your old hardware and software can still do what they did when you got them. Also, say what you want but a business must sell new products. Majority customer demand aside, those paychecks they give to their employees aren't just made by magic.

Also, if multiproc shouldn't be a concern under Win 98 as it's not gonna happen.

Do know, however, if you really need a somewhat up to date version of Office and wish to keep with Windows 98, you can install Office XP and then get from the Microsoft site a patch that makes it possible to open and save documents in the Office 2007 format. The fact they are still supporting ten year old software is something they should be complimented for.

They don't force you?????? Then why can I not use a new printer without having XP or higher??????? We're only talking about a printer, so they can't say older computers running older operating systems wouldn't be fast enough.

And how long before support for XP disappears? Pretty soon - only works on windows 7.

Most printers you can buy nowadays are so-called 'winprinters', all preprocessing is done by the driver instead of the printer itself.

Get a printer with a built-in print server, it should work on any OS that supports network printers.

I agree with a lot of the comments here...

I have gone through purges too. At one time I decided I wasn't going to "support" anything less that win98. Now I regret throwing my old 486 box and even went so far as to resurrect DOS on another machine

I agree the older stuff is getting harder to find. The pentium 3 chips I have been buying surplus are drying up and getting harder to find

I have a feeling before long I won't be able to get non-SATA drives (new)

Then don't use new stuff and be content(that was written before your total post makeover)
(the forum should always show that a post was edited- otherwise answers may look out of place!)

(well I decided I looked like I was just complaining) 😦

I've got computers in my collection for every other year from 1995-2010. If you look at one year to another, the advancements may not be a big deal. But if you look at a 5 year old pc and compare it with a 2010 pc, there's a huge difference in capability. And that capability is at least in my opinion, put to good use by the software developers in making more newb friendly and idiot-proof products. That takes some overhead, plus consumers like eye-candy and zip-doodads. Let's face it, the days of being able to get away with a grey interface and text heavy crap are gone.

One for every year? Now that is interesting! What do you have for 1995? Is it a 486 or pentium? 😁