Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: What are considered vintage these days?
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Stephen Cole
Nov 14, 2019, 4:50:59 AM11/14/19
to
Ant <a...@zimage.comANT> wrote:
> Are PowerBooks and original MacBooks (Air too) considered vintage now?
>
Different people will have different definitions of “vintage”. For me, it’s
vintage if it can’t comfortably run current (or near-current) versions of
essential software, which I think applies to PowerBooks and original
MacBooks. Those machines can certainly still serve as useful daily
computers, though, as long as era-specific software is used and certain
compromises are accepted.
--
M0TEY // STC
www.twitter.com/ukradioamateur
> Are PowerBooks and original MacBooks (Air too) considered vintage now?
>
Different people will have different definitions of “vintage”. For me, it’s
vintage if it can’t comfortably run current (or near-current) versions of
essential software, which I think applies to PowerBooks and original
MacBooks. Those machines can certainly still serve as useful daily
computers, though, as long as era-specific software is used and certain
compromises are accepted.
--
M0TEY // STC
www.twitter.com/ukradioamateur
nospam
Nov 14, 2019, 10:32:39 AM11/14/19
to
In article <h34mc1...@mid.individual.net>, Stephen Cole
<use...@stephenthomascole.com> wrote:
> Different people will have different definitions of łvintage˛.
the only definition that matters is apple's.
<use...@stephenthomascole.com> wrote:
> Different people will have different definitions of łvintage˛.
the only definition that matters is apple's.
nospam
Nov 14, 2019, 1:09:33 PM11/14/19
to
In article <h35ho5...@mid.individual.net>, Huge
<Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> >> Different people will have different definitions of 3vintage2.
nope. apple makes and supports the products, so they get to decide when
it's vintage or obsolete. nobody else.
same for any other product manufacturer.
<Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> >> Different people will have different definitions of 3vintage2.
> >
> > the only definition that matters is apple's.
>
> Umm, no. The only definition that matters is the market's.
> > the only definition that matters is apple's.
>
nope. apple makes and supports the products, so they get to decide when
it's vintage or obsolete. nobody else.
same for any other product manufacturer.
nospam
Nov 14, 2019, 2:29:48 PM11/14/19
to
In article <h35noq...@mid.individual.net>, Huge
> go along. "Obsolete", sure. But "vintage"? Nope.
i'm not the one making up definitions. that would be *you*.
apple is the *only* entity who decides whether *their* products are
currently supported, vintage or obsolete. nobody else.
the same applies to every other manufacturer for their own product
lines.
simple concept, really.
<Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> >> >> Different people will have different definitions of 3vintage2.
> >> >
> >> > the only definition that matters is apple's.
> >>
> >> Umm, no. The only definition that matters is the market's.
> >
> > nope. apple makes and supports the products, so they get to decide when
> > it's vintage or obsolete. nobody else.
>
> Oh, I see. You're making your own definitions for words up as you
> >> >> Different people will have different definitions of 3vintage2.
> >> >
> >> > the only definition that matters is apple's.
> >>
> >> Umm, no. The only definition that matters is the market's.
> >
> > nope. apple makes and supports the products, so they get to decide when
> > it's vintage or obsolete. nobody else.
>
> go along. "Obsolete", sure. But "vintage"? Nope.
i'm not the one making up definitions. that would be *you*.
apple is the *only* entity who decides whether *their* products are
currently supported, vintage or obsolete. nobody else.
the same applies to every other manufacturer for their own product
lines.
simple concept, really.
0 new messages