/retro/

File: hqdefault[1].jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

>>57511061
Remember when it was a marvel to even have a computer at all?

>show off your circlejerking!

>Old circlejerk ->

>>57511165
yep and what you won't remember on purpose is how an entry level workstation cost $5K. I wonder what group of people brought this cost down.

>>57511310
>what you won't remember on purpose is how an entry level workstation cost $5K

I can't remember that because it wasn't true. At least not in the last 26 years it wasn't. I can't speak for the 80s but in 1990 it was far less than $5k to have an "entry level" workstation computer. $1500 would a more reasonable amount, and far less was possible if you knew the right places to look, and had the right hook-ups in industry.

>>57511310
the fuck are you even on about nigger

>>57511995
>but in 1990 it was far less than $5k to have an "entry level" workstation computer. $1500 would a more reasonable amount, and far less was possible if you knew the right places to look, and had the right hook-ups in industry.
please, no $1,500 386SX DOS shitbox in 1990 was "workstation class", justin's actually right for once, in fact given your example he even underestimated since the entry-level peg was closer to the $10,000 range, maybe even beyond depending on what platform you went with

the PPro made some inroads in that regard, bringing the entry-level threshold down to $3-5k, but you sure as fuck weren't getting anything "workstation" worthy at that price point until maybe 1998 when OEMs were dumping surplus PPros or maybe the early 2000s when prices really started going down

File: ibm20ps220model2030-11382846[1].jpg (308KB, 1000x870px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 1000x870px

>>57513830
1. Nobody gives a fuck about "justin"
2. A 386SX machine would have been plenty to get started with in 1990.

That "shitbox" could potentially have had
>VGA
>nice external keyboard
>nice mouse
>hard drive
>32 bit CPU
>Unix in the form of IBM AIX

In the 80s a lot of the home computers were still 8 bit toys like the Commodore 64, and the computers used in workstations were already looking like what we use today for the most part.

But by 1990 that changed, and home computers started to look like 80s workstations.

I said earlier, just having a computer at home in your house was still an accomplishment. You'd be really fortunate to have something like an IBM PS/2 55SX. It was $3,895 to buy one new. So yes, a far cry from $1500.
Maybe by 1990 you could get one for a little less than that on the used market. And of course there were all the other tricks and techniques of men who know how to find bargains you could employ.

But 286's existed in the same form factor, and 286's are fine computers too and you could get very far ahead with one.

>>57513830
>you sure as fuck weren't getting anything "workstation" worthy at that price point until maybe 1998 when OEMs were dumping surplus PPros or maybe the early 2000s when prices really started going down

Bullshit. I used to see all kinds of high-grade stuff getting tossed in dumpsters in the late 90s. Some of it was Sun hardware, so it had to be pretty good. My dumb ass didn't care at the time because grey beards told me they couldn't run games.

File: DSCF2623.jpg (1MB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1944px

>>57511061

File: WAJnP.jpg (446KB, 1024x1171px)

446KB, 1024x1171px

>>57514347
>business tossing shit means it was free to begin with
this is how this selective information flow (circlejerking) starts.

for a more understandable example, actually post consumer catalogs of something available to you, showing a record of the price, instead of just jerking off to pictures you took of this now and making up your own records. How about best buy. Ad says it is 1996.

base consumer models are all $2,000, dollartimes says this is $3050. 3 years after eternal september so if you bought any of this, you're a kid who ruined the internet btw. But thankfully those kids were around to show interest since and began mass production so you can get workstations for less than $800 now. Very rarely see vintage ads with prices posted in these threads, wonder why.

>Gabriel Knight 2
>Ram Doubler

>>57515907
>>business tossing shit means it was free to begin with

It was free for me. I didn't take the Sun hardware but I took the x86 stuff. Not my fault if you were too much of a consumerist faggot at the time to look for the same opportunity.

File: 720-750_1991-PromoPhoto-32.jpg (132KB, 1001x694px)

132KB, 1001x694px

>>57514173
>A 386SX machine would have been plenty to get started with in 1990.
not for a workstation use case it wasn't

>>VGA
you really have no idea what real workstations were capable of back then do you? even macs were doing 24-bit color at higher resolutions than that shit was struggling to push 16 colors at

>>nice external keyboard
>>nice mouse
these are basic features that pretty much everything outside of low-end home computers offered you by that time

>>hard drive
ditto, and usually on the ATA bus meaning your storage options were extremely limited

>>32 bit CPU
workstation-class hardware was nearing 64-bit by that time

>>Unix in the form of IBM AIX
you're really just talking out of your ass at this point, the PS/2 exclusive AIX port was grade-A garbage that was dropped pretty much immediately, hell even if you had one of the few PS/2s that could run it well enough and still had disk space to spare (hope you had a big one, you can't even install it on most of them that only shipped with 60-80MB disks) it had basically no software, and the PS/2 hardware was far too anemic anyway for most of the applications you used AIX for in the first place

>and the computers used in workstations were already looking like what we use today for the most part.
this sentence kind of makes me think you really just aren't on a proper footing with your definition of "workstation computer"

>But by 1990 that changed, and home computers started to look like 80s workstations.
you really need to go actually look up some '80s workstations if you honestly believe that, PCs couldn't really begin to match a lot of their capabilities until well into the '90s when the first PPro systems started making the platform an attractive option in the entry-level

>I said earlier, just having a computer at home in your house was still an accomplishment.
it certainly was a very rare sight

>>57514347
we're not talking about the used market

>>57511310
>show off your circlejerking!
Why do people get butthurt because some people enjoy watching hardware pr0n and sharing it?

>>57515665
I too, had Soviet clones.
Cool machines.

>>57516612
>written by a retarded piece of shit millennial
Millennial hipsters feeling nostalgic for things made or commonplace before they were born is cringey as fuck.

>>57516623

Actual cherry switches on the keyboard btw. Pretty weird for a "home computer", let alone a commie one... They switched to rubber dome for newer models.

>>57516669
I enjoy restoring old hardware, learning the ins and outs of how it works, and learning about its development. I'm a boring nerd though, so there's that.

File: 856.jpg (258KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 600x450px

>>57516669

God forbid i enjoy myself.

>>57516669
I'm in my mid 20's and grew up with things like AT clones and Amigas, Ataris.
Also I don't think most youngsters here aren't nostalgic but just interested in the hardware, go to /r/retrocomputing for nostalgic faggots, most people I know from here are in their late 30's.

>>57516733
Are you really enjoying? Or are you just trying to fit in, like what all you typical millennials do.

>>57515907
>this is how this selective information flow (circlejerking) starts.
I don't agree with him saying basic workstation stuff was only 1.5k but it was free for us, so where's the problem?
I had lot of shit that costed thousands of dollars when it was new in the early 90's by the beginning of the end of the decade.

>>57516758
>people like things that I don't like
stop with the millennia shit, we won't get into age, you won't get that satisfaction

>>57516758

I'm trying to fit in where? The giant dork club? Wow, such a privilege...

>>57511061
Thanks for making a new thread, glad to wake up and see one.

>>57516696
Yeah, I had a 8080 clone with mechanical keys too, some over them where pretty OP for their time as home computers. Like for example Speccy clones with mechanical keys and more memory.

>>57516669
>nostalgic
where are people talking about nostalgia?

File: 1422756018189.gif (171KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 500x500px

>>57516977
cherked derbs

File: 1451689831208.jpg (83KB, 605x467px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 605x467px

>>57516733

>>57516669
who gives a shit about nostalgia
it's a fun appeal to novelty and a cheap way to explore new uses for computers you wouldn't give a shit about otherwise

>>57517222

Wow i've never seen one of thse before. 80s "luggable" form factor on a 1999 computer, that's crazy bananas!

>>57517195
That's one pretty calculator

>>57517269

I suspect the dude has his knickers in a twist from pesky millenials culturally appropriating his decade.

File: justin.png (291KB, 426x258px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 426x258px

>>57517354
Implying he's not a millennial himself

File: 1422760638610.jpg (237KB, 1112x1026px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1112x1026px

>>57517269

>>57517371
What kind of sorcery is this?

>>57514173
>2. A 386SX machine would have been plenty to get started with in 1990.

wtf am I reading?

A 386SX VGA system was not workstation class. It was plenty of computer for a normie to "get started." But it was not a publishing platform, a CAD machine, a system for science and Mathematica, etc.

Workstation class meant NeXT, Sun, top tier Macs, etc. At the time some would have argued that nothing in Apple's lineup other than the IIfx was truly workstation class, and purists would have said only if it was running A/UX.

>>57517508
Yeah, that's retarded, no x86 machine was considered workstation class back then, it was all about the 68k

>>57517508
You'll notice it was the autist who brought up the notion of a workstation being a necessity when all that was mentioned was a "a computer" here>>57511165

>>57517594
Don't even know why they started talking about workstations.

>>57516423
>the PS/2 exclusive AIX port was grade-A garbage that was dropped pretty much immediately

You know, the thing is sometimes having grade-A garbage was enough when the alternative was nothing at all.

>>57515907
>Very rarely see vintage ads with prices posted in these threads, wonder why.
What's the point if I got one of those machines three years later after release from a relative for free when I was a kid?

>>57516758
>Or are you just trying to fit in

Yeah, I'm gonna be drowning in that retro PC gurrl pussy

>>57517654
The only other person who shares my interest is my brother...

>>57517508
>A 386SX VGA system was not workstation class. It was plenty of computer for a normie to "get started." But it was not a publishing platform, a CAD machine, a system for science and Mathematica, etc.

Sure it was. Other than maybe the CAD part. Maybe not the #1 choice for publishing but it would get the job done.

>>57517677
x86 was not workstation class at that time dummy
there weren't even workstations utilizing a 386

File: HPIM2191.jpg (3MB, 2608x1952px)

3MB, 2608x1952px

retro thread needs to be a general !

there is also a commodore 64 that is not in picture

>>57517717
It already is, but there's not having one 24/7 on a fast board like /g/

>>57517734
no point*

>>57517508
the IIfx by itself is insane, it would probably be reasonable to call any big-box Mac II (and maybe the IIcx/IIci with them) "workstation-class" if you ask me, they ran the same chips as the Sun/HP/NeXT big iron, had more than decent 2D graphics capabilities to compete in the low-end on that front, and were all A/UX-capable

>>57517610
look at justin's reply and that guy's response to it, he was probably just thinking of "workstation" more in the idea of business fleet boxes, where yeah he was totally reasonable to assume the likes of the PS/2 55SX would be decent

>>57517623
>You know, the thing is sometimes having grade-A garbage was enough when the alternative was nothing at all.
except it was really a choice between paying thousands of dollars for nothing at all or just having nothing at all, which even then isn't true, because there /were/ alternatives for those who wanted to run Unix on a PC, the more established and infinitely more compatible Xenix and its derivatives come to mind

there's a reason AIX only had one version ever ported to the PC platform, it was useless and expensive to boot, it wasn't an alternative to anything unless you really wanted to pay out the ass for something OS/2 could probably accomplish better anyway, since the kind of stuff where Unix could really shine were well out of the grasp of a single-user desktop no matter what OS you ran on it

File: IMG1022.jpg (624KB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

624KB, 2592x1944px

>>57517717

there you go

386 with 387fpu at its finest

>>57517794
That's a cool monitor

>>57517717
>retro thread needs to be a general !

Pls no we're already seeing the same group of hostile faggots show up that have infested the generals of /vr/. Don't give them a "hang out". Just these threads be a sometimes thing.

>>57517775
>the IIfx by itself is insane, it would probably be reasonable to call any big-box Mac II (and maybe the IIcx/IIci with them) "workstation-class" if you ask me
As consumer hardware, yeah.

>>57517832
There isn't enough content for a fast board like /g/ anyways for it to be a general.

Also about the hostile faggots, just ignore them, they are a funny community to kek at sometimes, bumping the threads.

>>57517717
Do speakers exist that would go well with a XT/AT?
Even having early 90's speakers looks wrong with those machines.

>>57516423
>even macs were doing 24-bit color at higher resolutions than that shit was struggling to push 16 colors at

Macintosh II was the first Mac to support color and cost over $5000. Not really fair to say "even macs". Macs of 1990 != Macs of today. They were pretty much workstations when they came out. Comparing it to the PS/2 is unfair.

>>57517775
man, I have not heard of xenix in a long fucking time

This thread just makes me miss ejecting/swapping floppies.

>>57517677
>16-bit data path
>workstation

Choose one.

>Maybe not the #1 choice for publishing but it would get the job done.

We're talking about 1990. 386sx. DOS+Windows 3.0. Sorry, nobody was doing graphic design on those things. Broderbund Print Shop doesn't count.

By contrast a Macintosh Plus...though not a workstation...could actually manage page layout for small publications. You wouldn't want to layout a book or a magazine with high rez photos or anything. But a B&W laser printed newsletter with EPS art and mixed fonts was well within its reach as long as you had a hard drive and preferably 2.5 or 4MB.

Also: looking at period ads I'm not seeing even shitty 386sx machines for $1,500.

A NeXTcube with a 25 MHz 68040, UNIX, Display PostScript, 16MB, a DSP, and a fully I/O processor serviced architecture...THAT was a mother fucking workstation even though its competitors were already moving to RISC.

>>57517932
Get a $2 drive off ebay and a floppy and just play with it

>>57517953
>A NeXTcube with a 25 MHz 68040, UNIX, Display PostScript, 16MB, a DSP, and a fully I/O processor serviced architecture
I'd fuck it

>>57517794
That monitor is the same as I had with my first PC around 2001, which was a Pentium S 120mhz machine. I got it out of the back of a garbage truck.

File: HPIM2193.jpg (3MB, 1952x2608px)

3MB, 1952x2608px

another angle

alt-ought I have no idea how to get any of these machines going nor do I know what software to go with them, but they all seem to work and post

>>57517954
I should probably just get my Amiga etc out of storage.

>>57517985
Do it and show us, I like Amiga p0rn

>>57517953
>We're talking about 1990. 386sx. DOS+Windows 3.0. Sorry, nobody was doing graphic design on those things. Broderbund Print Shop doesn't count.
It might get the job done for a weak home user, but that's it.

>>57517979

that is a early 90s CTX 14" monitor dated from around 94 - 95 I think

File: austin386sx.png (289KB, 357x585px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 357x585px

>>57517840
expensive-ass IIs were hardly "consumer", that dream died with Steve's first ouster, they were built and equipped for businesses, while the compacts serviced what few consumer users they had

>>57517898
you're very right

>>57517953
here's a $1500 piece of shit out of the may 15 1990 issue of PC mag, they were around, but I wouldn't even run Windows on that thing

>>57517953
>>57516423
>we're not talking about the used market
Why not? It existed then as it exists now. There's no reason to assume everyone bought their computers brand new. In my own experiences the most hardcore computer geek types I knew always had some workstation setup they scrounged up from parts here and there or hand-me-downs from wealthier friends. And certain bits and pieces of tech were known to mysteriously vanish from labs and workplaces.

Another technique was going through business or university programs and getting discounts. You can't just go by the sticker prices you see in magazines back then. You could do better than that if you tried.

>>57518012
Yes, I was a poorfag teenager from the country so I had to take what I could get.

>>57517973
>tfw you'll never open the box of a brand new NeXTcube
>never place all the pieces like artwork on your desk
>never get goose bumps when it first starts up
>never print your shit at 400dpi, 100dpi higher than the other kids with their shitty LaserWriters

Why live?

>>57518056
>expensive-ass IIs were hardly "consumer"
You just said yourself "any big box Macintosh"

>>57518005
So even as far back 1990 PCs were just good for gaymes and shitposting/fapping on BBSes?

>>57518101
Except they weren't even good for games or watching porn.

>>57518061
Yeah, that's what I remember also.

File: IMGP3324.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px)

1MB, 2560x1920px

Cleaning out this guy right now, powers on and reads 66 on the LED display.

>>57518056
I stand corrected. 386shit was available for $1,500.

>>57518108
Y-you don't think those Sun machines had any porn on them do you?

>>57518137
No, but there where machines way better suited for gayming and highres porn.

>>57518061
>Why not? It existed then as it exists now.
because it's irrelevant in the context of workstations, which were primarily marketed to customers who weren't really keen on surfing rummage sales and illegally fishing entry-level SPARC lunchboxes out of university dumpsters to build their IT infrastructure, aside from the accounting nightmare, the used market is sporadic and also doesn't really provide the support many of these businesses required

>Another technique was going through business or university programs and getting discounts. You can't just go by the sticker prices you see in magazines back then. You could do better than that if you tried.
if you think that meant you were going to get workstation-class gear at 386SX prices you've got another thing coming

>>57518094
which were all IIs (II, IIx, IIfx) or top-of-the-line Quadras (900, 950) with base prices exceeding $5,000

>>57518135
yeah it really was hot garbage

>>57518166
I assume the porn industry of the time did some of their work on Macs.

>>57511310
>yep and what you won't remember on purpose is how an entry level workstation cost $5K.
and much more.
I visited Motorola back in the '80s and goggled at the Apollo and Xerox workstations running on 10Base2 ethernet networks. Made our PS/2s look pretty feeble.

>>57518178
>because it's irrelevant in the context of workstations

But it's...not. It's pretty darn relevant. Read any historical account of the period and you'll always hear a story from the dudes back then about how they managed to finagle their way into having a much more powerful PC than they paycheck (or lack thereof) would indicate.

Your idea of history seems to be based on this abstract theoretical customer who just buys a pre-built system, but that's not how it worked. It was messy. Especially in regards to powerful home computers.

>>57518178
>which were all IIs (II, IIx, IIfx) or top-of-the-line Quadras (900, 950) with base prices exceeding $5,000
They where still consumer market, also the mid-class machines would count as big box too.

>>57518247
True that.
Not to mention the price degenerated very fast.

>>57516758
you're probably a millennial trying to sound wise beyond your years. look at you, mature and smart for your age.

>>57518247
those are some nice fucky anecdotes and all but they really don't offer strong support to your point, neither does your idea of a workstation system as a "powerful home computer"

the big businesses buying these high end systems were not fishing them out of dumpsters and surplus auctions, and the wild success of vendors like Sun and SGI were a testament to this far more than "I know a guy who knew a guy that got a really nice system at work once" (???)

>>57518271
...by what metric? the badge on the front? you keep saying this but you have nothing else behind it to make me see it your way

>>57517394
A E S T H E T I C

E

S

T

H

E

T

I

C

>>57518469
>...by what metric? the badge on the front? you keep saying this but you have nothing else behind it to make me see it your way
Those machines where consumer grade, you walked into a shop and bought them, not like the "workstation grade" SPARCstation for example.
You where the one to say big box Macintoshes where workstation material and I agree, but they where still consumer grade.

>>57518506
Consumer grade as workstations to add to that, because you mentioned Steve Jobses dream, he didn't dream about a workstation in every home but just a computer.

>>57518134
Nice dude, better pics of the motherboard?

>>57518469
Not him but wasn't the discussion about general and second hand market too? After all it started by talking about anons, not businesses.
So the "businesses didn't fish bins" does not count, what counts is how we the people acquired these machines and I must agree with him, if you had any brain at all you could fish yourself some pretty nice systems because they degenerated so quick, a 10K workstation 3 years latter for a few hundred bucks was no biggie, specially if you got around the scene.

>>57518496
S P A M
P
A
M

File: IMGP3336.jpg (2MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1920px

>>57518539
Post-cleaning. You don't want to know what this looked like before I took the canned air to it. The PSU was especially bad, clumps of matter I don't want to identify.

>>57518636
Real sexy, I have a P1 with a Dallas CMOS too, already prepared to coincell mod, but to my surprise the original battery still holds charge great.

Also once got a XT clone with everything from monitor to printer that had been sitting in a dry basement for almost 30 years, in the same spot, it was only used for a few years before being tossed there, so it was and still is in supreme mint condition.

>>57517981
>alt-ought I have no idea how to get any of these machines going nor do I know what software to go with them, but they all seem to work and post
what do you do with them then? post pics on /g/?
nice tho

>>57518035
It would be pretty cool if you could find a way to print through a network on those things.

>>57518778
You mean like using it as a terminal connected to a big iron that has a printer connected to it?

>>57518747
One of the funniest ways to know you're into garbage (sometimes literally if dumpster diving threads doesn't prove that enough) is when the EXACT same thing is said by the "shitposters" as the normal inhabitants of the thread.

>I can't do anything on my shitbox, but here's some pics of it (fits in)
>You can't do anything with this shit, all you do is post pics. ("shitposter")

that's how you know your "hobby" is fucked

>>57518846
I'm not a shitposter, I think those are nice machines, but if he does not know or want to use them, what's the point?

File: 1477608461287.jpg (1MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x3264px

>>57518846
>(fits in)
trying too hard again

>all these posts about consumer, workstation, big box

Workstations were powerful. The fastest CPUs on motherboards designed to exploit every last clock cycle. Fast buses. Lots of RAM. Networking. Coprocessors. High resolution bit mapped graphics driven by a capable language and rasterizer.

They typically ran UNIX. Though top end Macs qualify despite the shortcomings of Mac OS classic.

They were typically very expensive and I doubt many people were piecing them together from garage sales or garbage bins. Sure you could get a workstation class computer on the used market. That doesn't mean workstations in general were $1,500.

Honestly, I wouldn't consider anything from the PC compatible world to be workstation class until probably the 486DX2 models, if not Pentium. That might ruffle some feathers. But you can't judge on straight CPU+RAM. PC motherboards, ports, and graphics cards were lacking for a long time. To say nothing of Win3.1 which was a steaming pile of shit despite the nostalgia feels it creates.

Workstations slowly ceased being a "thing" in the late 1990s / early 2000s. Moore's Law was delivering incredible power to the consumer. The Power Mac G5 and the pre-trash can Mac Pros stand out as some of the last computers intended to be workstation class, i.e. a step above consumer machines of the same time period.

Now computing hardware is boring. Cheap ass notebooks offer more power than a normie will ever use. And if it wasn't for all the shit, bloated programming in the world a damn Pi could be your main computer.

>tfw i miss the days of optimizing C code for a processor measured in MHz
>tfw i miss optimizing memory use for a bank of RAM smaller than the cache on today's processors

>>57518952
>i'd like to work her station

>>57519028
>sure anon, facebook is not loading and youtube is slow

>>57519011
>Now computing hardware is boring. Cheap ass notebooks offer more power than a normie will ever use. And if it wasn't for all the shit, bloated programming in the world a damn Pi could be your main computer.
Sad but true, exactly what I was thinking what was was checking the specs of the iPhone7 30min ago, damn thing is workstation grade for even a 15 year old Workstation, what do we use that power for? Angry birds and Facebook with bloated web scripts.

>>57518846
>>57518898
kek, what a failed bait attempt that was

>>57518506
sorry but I really just can't wrap my head around that logic, it's just marketing methodology, that's not really where I'd draw the line in this case, this gear was built like a workstation, had a lot of the features you'd come to expect from a workstation, and even ran an OEM-supported real SysV, and it definitely wasn't the kind of shit you'd just casually walk into a store and buy, even if there were plenty of apple dealers

but whatever, we seem to agree where it actually matters, so if you're down I'll just agree to disagree on the pedantics

>>57518583
>Not him but wasn't the discussion about general and second hand market too? After all it started by talking about anons, not businesses.
not sure which comment chain you're reading up through, this whole thing started with justin talking about the price of a brand new workstation back in the day, nothing about how we acquired our own gear

it's no doubt the used market was a big deal in the home and small business arenas, but those weren't really the ones buying $10,000+ workstations to run $10,000+-a-seat software, a lot of that shit went to big business, who were definitely buying it direct from the manufacturer

>So the "businesses didn't fish bins" does not count, what counts is how we the people acquired these machines and I must agree with him, if you had any brain at all you could fish yourself some pretty nice systems because they degenerated so quick, a 10K workstation 3 years latter for a few hundred bucks was no biggie, specially if you got around the scene.
don't disagree with this in the context of you or I at all, but the original conversation stemmed from the price of brand new hardware, which was certainly very expensive

>>57519094
>but whatever, we seem to agree where it actually matters, so if you're down I'll just agree to disagree on the pedantics
Just one thing to clear up, what I basically meant is that you as a person, consumer, could easily buy it retail then the other workstation grade stuff that was mainly sold only for businesses and not that easy to acquire.

>>57519054
>Facebook with bloated web scripts.

PDF Rendering: 89.7 Mpixels/sec

Modern web page rendering: 89.7 secs for every ad, ad tracker, framework, and animation library to load, and for you to click away every popup, slide up, slide down, and side slide. All so you can read an article with 16KB of text.

God I hate the modern web.

>>57519158
http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

>>57519196
How have I never seen this?

>You loaded all 7 fontfaces of a shitty webfont just so you could say "Hi." at 100px height at the beginning of your site?
>You piece of shit.

File: quadputer.jpg (1MB, 2325x3207px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2325x3207px

>>57519011
>Honestly, I wouldn't consider anything from the PC compatible world to be workstation class until probably the 486DX2 models, if not Pentium.
as much as I was just shitting on the PC platform, if you absolutely paid out the ass you could get your hands on something at least somewhat entry-level with a proper storage bus, operating system, and some nice CAD/misc accelerators to pick up the slack

>>57519132
sure, I got you
though I wonder if even Apple dealers carried the more high-end systems aside from maybe floor models, especially the likes of the IIfx, I definitely know you couldn't buy them configured with A/UX from brick and mortar retailers at least

>>57517717
The upright tower under the table you have there, that looks just like my first computer... I don't remember much about it, I was pretty clueless about tech when I had it.

File: IMGP3341.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1920px

>>57518134
>>57518636
Look at this beauty, all cleaned up and spit-shined. Anyone have critiques on bay arrangement?

>>57518846
So what exactly do you -do- in this thread? What is your interest here?

File: IMGP3344.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1920px

>>57520079
this meme machine just shitposted at me then started playing vocaroo related

http://vocaroo.com/i/s0v48kYMxVA6

>>57519094
>the original conversation stemmed from the price of brand new hardware, which was certainly very expensive

The original conversation was about how it was a wonder to have any computer at all, used or new.

This line right here
>yep and what you won't remember on purpose is how an entry level workstation cost $5K.

Didn't even have anything to do with it and came out of left field. Who said anything about workstations? I was only talking about computers in general.

I'm the guy who said his first PC was a Pentium S in 2001 (although I used my Dad's 386 a lot since 1998) I got out of a garbage truck. That computer was pretty old by that point but I was over the moon because I could run Windows 98 on it and use it to play emulated games and access the internet. And if I had the knowledge back then I could have done a lot more with it than I did.

>>57520160
During normal operation or in Safe mode, your computer may play "Fur Elise" or "It's a Small, Small World" seemingly at random. This is an indication sent to the PC speaker from the computer's BIOS that the CPU fan is failing or has failed, or that the power supply voltages have drifted out of tolerance. This is a design feature of a detection circuit and system BIOSes developed by Award/Unicore from 1997 on.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/261186

>>57520308
>Didn't even have anything to do with it and came out of left field. Who said anything about workstations? I was only talking about computers in general.
hope you aren't trying to say that's me, that's justin being justin, he's retarded

I jumped in after he replied to justin's post saying $1500 was a "reasonable" amount for an entry-level workstation, which was just ludicrous (see >>57518056 for the garbage that money bought you)

>>57520079
>>57520160
damn that thing must have been bitchin' before they board swapped it, even then the upgrade still wasn't all that bad

>>57521177
Oh, jolly. Now I get to go hunting for a PSU for this monster.

>>57521222
I'm not very well versed in pre-2k tech, what would this machine have been running originally?

P.S. checked and triple checked

>>57521177
>This is an indication sent to the PC speaker from the computer's BIOS that ...
I read indication as incantation.

>>57521275
>what would this machine have been running originally?
by the looks of it it started out as a high-end or upper mid-range 486DX2-66, then the owners board swapped it up to a Pentium-133 and added in that NEC multispin and syquest drive some time in probably mid-1996

the 5.25'' floppy drive with an oldschool black bezel was probably a replacement or after-the-fact addition as well, seems silly that whoever built it wouldn't have bothered to bezel match it when they obviously did so with everything else

either way it's good shit, you should post the guts so we can really get autistic on it, curious to see if the SCSI controller was an upgrade too

>>57521564
I'm retarded and didn't see the rest of your posts, did you just build this out of spares or did you get it this way and were just cleaning it out?
almost looks like the SCSI controller is onboard but I don't see any 50-pin headers

File: IMGP3351.jpg (2MB, 1920x2560px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x2560px

>>57521564
>>57521784
It was exactly like this when I got it, all I did was clean it out and remove a redundant IDE cable. The SCSI connector you're looking for is hiding behind a ribbon cable in the top left corner of >>57518636, you can see half of it peeking out.

The previous owner worked for NASA, he also had several laptops that I now own too. An acer, an early 2000s Compaq Presario (styled like an iMac from the same era), a couple NECs, and my favorites are two Toshibas. One's a Satellite with a nipple, 90's probably, and the other is a T1100 Plus. The only one that isn't in near-perfect condition is the Compaq, which is in such a poor state I can easily assume it's the only laptop he used regularly, or at all. I'll probably post pictures of them as I get around to checking each one for functionality.

File: IMGP3348.jpg (2MB, 2560x1920px)

2MB, 2560x1920px

>>57521871
I'm an awful photographer.

Here's one of the PCI VGA card.

File: IMGP3353.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1920px

>>57521898
The ISA card is a realtek NIC, by the way.

>>57521871
huh I didn't even notice that, seems like a pretty damn good upgrade, looks like it was when the P133 was still the fastest thing on socket 7 you could actually get your hands on as a consumer too

if you really want a critique on the bay loadout, would work on getting a grey-bezel 5.25'' floppy drive to match that floppy drive and hard disk cage if you can source one cheap enough, shit personally I'd even look for some other date-matched components and slowly work on turning it back into the 486-66 it used to be

but really as it is it's still a pretty nice box a lot of people would probably kill for, not gonna shit on it at all

>>57518184

I'm guessing Amiga was the premier porn machine

>>57511310
the chinese

File: computer1_blog.jpg (17KB, 561x427px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 561x427px

Computer Chronicles episode on the 486:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdFJZKJMerA

Consumer buyer's guide for 1990:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRpHYaBw9oY

I love that show.

>>57521177
topkek

>>57518480
topkek, kids today who won't get the reference

File: 1479173939696.jpg (1MB, 2560x1920px)

1MB, 2560x1920px

>>57518636
SCSI?

>>57522740
>SCSI?
The presence of the Adaptec chip suggests so.
Must be fast SCSI (LVD Single Ended?).

>>57522665
Me too, one of the best things ever happen to television.

File: Picture 2.png (251KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1280x1024px

Who /PowerPC/ here? I've been using this thing as my main driver for three days and it's comfy af.

File: IMG_20160613_031131.jpg (744KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

744KB, 1280x960px

>>57523242
Glad you like it, I just did some maintenance on my dual G4 yesterday.

>>57523242
how hard would it be to get a linux distro running on a ppc laptop?

>>57523288
Not harder then on a x86, Debian would probably be the best pick, because it's software support for PPC is quite up to date.

>>57523295
ITS A BOMB!

>>57523288
Not hard at all, but graphics acceleration got fucked on PPC machines when Linux switched to KMS (or so I've heard).

>>57523319
beware of data rot, literary

>>57521871
>fap fap fap fap

>>57517981
>i don't know what to do with them
>x86 shitboxes
Glad it's nothing special and just x86 shit

File: 10750228_878112715555252_8563781387026561318_o.jpg (148KB, 2048x1536px)

148KB, 2048x1536px

>>57524781

File: 10629515_878112735555250_7162624228569827965_o.jpg (178KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 2048x1536px

>>57524796

File: 10422443_878112418888615_1125074441183276292_n.jpg (93KB, 720x960px)

93KB, 720x960px

>>57524819

File: 10459011_878112555555268_1065023363755438254_o.jpg (220KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 2048x1536px

>>57524837

>>57524763
God bless PnP

File: Photo 13.11.2016, 21 47 08.jpg (2MB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1936px

>>57511061
T H I C C

>>57524900
Nice shitbox Pablo

>>57524866
Ñ

File: 000002.jpg (309KB, 1741x973px)

309KB, 1741x973px

>>57525740

>>57524279

one of them is a 8088xt the philips one

>>57519011
The way it feels to me is the workstations of the 80s were what we eventually came to think of as the desktop computer from 1995 to today.

It's rather fascinating to think there were a few thousand people in the 80s who were so ahead of the curve. They must have thought the PC revolution of the 90s was nothing special.

>>57524866
pls be Madrid

I just found a mine of CDs which is the only way I can get shit into my PowerMac 6100/60. It's got 40MB RAM. What is the best OS version for it? Also recommend apps.

>>57527564
8.6

>>57527564
no network?

>>57527609
I can't find any AAUI transpoders or whatever the fuck they're called in my country and shipping fees are sky-high for some reason.

>>57527621
I think the cheapest ones from the US are like $35 together with postage to anywhere.

>>57527658
Nah, they all charge out the ass to my country and the total price gets to the point where it's no longer tax free and I have to go pay taxes for a fucking cable because RJ45 didn't exist back then or Apple wanted compatibility or some shit.

>>57527695
Where are you?
It's for compatibility yeah. RJ45 wasn't the consumer standard yet.

>>57527718
Uruguay. I have no idea why shipping is so expensive, Argentina is a lot cheaper, Brazil is a lot cheaper, and we're a dot in the middle of them. Also over 50U$S or so I have to pay tax, unless I go the courier way where it's shipped to an address in miami, and then sent over here, then I pay tax over 200U$S but courier is almost as expensive as taxes.

>>57527743
That fucking sucks.

>Show off your old tech!

But we already have a ThinkPad General...

>>57527895
We are talking about actual old tech and not garbage.

>>57527895
>thinkpad
>retro
maybe the first ibm models are but the lenovo ones arent old enough for this thread.

>>57527895
old tech not tryhard hipster shit that kind of looks old

>>57524886
This should let you load any custom BIOS addons if you make your own chip?

>>57511165
no. im not that old