Re: durability of high-tech equipment

[creadick@mindspring.com (Nowell & Jennifer Creadick)]

Great post Jack...let me add my 1890's Fairbanks banjo..perfect shape
despite constant use, 1971 Mercedes 280, extermely reliable, 1969 Triumph
mototcycle...extermely reliable. My father in law is using my old Mac Plus
with great enjoyment; my wife operates her business on a Mac SE and uses
the same old Singer; my daughter uses my 60's Pentax H3 constantly and it
has never needed repair.. etc etc.  By the way if you use a color Mac and
want to get the baddest desktop in town download the Kaleidascope desktop
manager....a blast!!!  Nowell

At 3:05 PM 2/26/97, Jack Campin wrote:
>"David W. Almy" <dalmy@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> OK, reality check. This argument flunks the laugh test. What percent of
>> the products that you buy do you honestly expect to use for HALF A
>> CENTURY?  Any?
>
>The cameras I use most often are a Leica IIIA (1938) and (until it died a few
>months ago) a Zeiss Super Ikonta (1935).  My girlfriend uses a Singer sewing
>machine made in 1924 and SINGER STILL SUPPLIES THE PARTS, even for machines
>made in the last century (if you think LUGnuts are retro freaks, just do a
>web search for resources on antique sewing machines).  My flute and one of my
>clarinets were made around 1880; both needed an overhaul that cost far more
>than I paid for either, but the result was worth it.  I use woodworking tools
>100 years old and drawing instruments owned by my great-grandfather.  There's
>so little that can go wrong with my Overton low whistle that it won't need
>anything beyond cleaning and dry storage to keep it playable for 1000 years.
>
>I'd rather see my money go into keeping skilled repairmen in business than
>in buying unnecessary replacements for potentially useful equipment that had
>to be dumped in landfill.
>
>
>> Do you seriously expect to be using your computer you are now using, in
>> it's present form, even 50 WEEKS from now?
>
>This one (a Mac Classic II) is four years old and I don't see why not.  The
>one in the next room (a Mac Plus) just died after giving ten years' useful
>service as a word processing engine.  Both had many software upgrades but no
>change to the hardware - much like the Singer and the IIIA; their designers
>didn't expect us to be using the same brands of film and thread for the
>product's lifetime.
>
>
>> Do YOU expect to be here, and still functional, 50 years from now?
>
>No, but I'd rather leave future generations usable tools than a garbage
>disposal problem; just as I regard archival stability as a reason for
>using one photographic medium rather than another.  People 100 years from
>now are every bit as important an audience for my pictures as anybody now
>living.  Using C-41 would be throwing all my work in the trash.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>jack@purr.demon.co.uk  -  Jack Campin, 2 Haddington Place, Edinburgh EH7 4AE

Chapel Hill, NC

Although love may fail, courtesy should prevail.