Subject: RE: Restoration: how far should it go??

From: "Feldman, Robert" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue Jun 17 09:46:00 2003

I had my Otrona 8:16 upgraded from 256KB to 640KB RAM, so it now has stacked chips. However, that was a mod done at the time (actually, Otrona Advanced Systems had gone under by then, but it was a 3rd party (Brown Enterprises) mod that was current with the machine. What Tony was objecting to is a modern collector hot-rodding an old box by increasing the RAM (or processor, or ...) in a way that would not have been done contemporaneously with the machine.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Davis [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 2:13 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Restoration: how far should it go??

Eric Smith wrote:

>"jamesd" <[email-masked]> wrote:
>  
>
>>I see you have higher standards than IBM, for a while after the AT was
>>released they sold ram that was two chips piggy backed so they could get
>>more
>>ram on the board.
>>    
>>
><snip>
>
>Both the CLCC on substrate and the factory-stacked DIPs were actually
>quite reliable.  Until ZIPs, SIPPs, and DIMMs were invented, that was
>the highest packaging density in common usage for RAM.
>
>  
>
I thought one DIP had an inverted CS, Though I might be wrong. I did the 
stacked thing on my atari 400,
Stacked 8K chips to get 16K. But that was in 82 and the atari H/W 
manuals are in the garage.
Jim Davis.

---

From: [email-masked] (Tony Duell)
Date: Tue Jun 17 09:54:27 2003

> I had my Otrona 8:16 upgraded from 256KB to 640KB RAM, so it now has 
> stacked chips. However, that was a mod done at the time (actually, 
> Otrona Advanced Systems had gone under by then, but it was a 3rd party 
> (Brown Enterprises) mod that was current with the machine. What Tony was 
> objecting to is a modern collector hot-rodding an old box by increasing 
> the RAM (or processor, or ...) in a way that would not have been done 
> contemporaneously with the machine.
  
Related to that is what you should do if you find a modified machine -- 
do you keep the modification, or return it to factory spec? There are 
plenty of arguments either way (e.g. 'The modification is part of the 
history of the machine and should be kept' .vs. 'The machine should be 
preserved as it was originally'). Personally, I am undecided on this. 
Sometimes I keep the modification (particularly if it's useful and 
doesn't adversely affect the operation and repairabilty of the machine), 
sometimes I remove it.

-tony

---

From: Vintage Computer Festival <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue Jun 17 09:57:34 2003

> doesn't adversely affect the operation and repairabilty of the machine),

If you are merely a collector (I like to consider myself an "archivist") I
think the modification is part of the historical fabric of the machine,
and changing it would alter that history.

If you're just a hacker, and you intend to continue use of the machine,
then any change you make becomes part of the historical fabric of that
machine.

It just depends on how you look at it.

-- 

Sellam Ismail                                        Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger                http://www.vintage.org

 * Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *