Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #15049 > unrolled thread

Old Calculator Web Museum

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Old Calculator Web Museum Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-12-01 21:56 +0000
    Re: Old Calculator Web Museum The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2017-12-01 14:31 -0800
    Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Batchman <batchman@dosville.foo> - 2017-12-02 10:21 +1100
    Re: Old Calculator Web Museum RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-12-02 02:16 +0000
      Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-12-02 03:14 +0000
        Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-12-02 09:59 +0100
          Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Bruce Horrocks <07.013@scorecrow.com> - 2017-12-03 23:51 +0000
            Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-12-04 00:26 +0000
              Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-12-06 06:22 +0100
                Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-12-06 11:17 +0000
            Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-12-06 06:32 +0100
    Re: Old Calculator Web Museum Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2017-12-02 10:50 +0000
    Re: Old Calculator Web Museum philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2017-12-14 18:41 -0600

#15049 — Old Calculator Web Museum

<URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>

Quoting from the URL above:

   Welcome to the Old Calculator Web Museum. Let me introduce myself. I'm
   Rick Bensene, the curator of this museum. I'm 57, live in a rural area
   outside of Oregon City, Oregon USA (near the end of the Oregon Trail),
   called Beavercreek, and am a computing/ network/telecommunications
   professional. I've been a fan of all kinds of technology since I was a
   youngster in the mid-1960's.

   The museum pages aren't fancy, focusing on content rather than flare.
   This museum is simply devoted to preserving, documenting, and sharing
   the technology of desktop automatic calculating machines -- from the
   electro-mechanical calculators of the 1950's and '60's, through the
   beginnings of the pocket wonders we have today, which had their roots in
   the early 1970's, and on into the beginnings of the desktop computer of
   the mid-1970's through the early 1980's.

   For more information about the museum, please see the FAQ (Frequently
   Asked Questions).

   I'm always looking for old calculators of interest. If you have an old
   machine which was made between 1950 and 1975, I may be interested in
   making it a part of the museum. For more information about specific
   machines I'm interested in acquiring for the museum, see my WANTED page
   or click the "WANTED" section below. If you have a machine which seems
   to fit these interests and are looking for a new home for it, please
   drop me an EMail with information about the machine.

   ...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#15051

On 12/01/2017 01:56 PM, Rich wrote:
> <URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>

Very nice.  We bought something similar to the Sharp Compet 15 (maybe 
even the Compet 15, but I haven't seen it for decades) for $100 from The 
Akron, which was a wonderful cheap-really-cool-stuff store that 
unfortunately went out of business.



> Quoting from the URL above:
>
>     Welcome to the Old Calculator Web Museum. Let me introduce myself. I'm
>     Rick Bensene, the curator of this museum. I'm 57, live in a rural area
>     outside of Oregon City, Oregon USA (near the end of the Oregon Trail),
>     called Beavercreek, and am a computing/ network/telecommunications
>     professional. I've been a fan of all kinds of technology since I was a
>     youngster in the mid-1960's.
>
>     The museum pages aren't fancy, focusing on content rather than flare.
>     This museum is simply devoted to preserving, documenting, and sharing
>     the technology of desktop automatic calculating machines -- from the
>     electro-mechanical calculators of the 1950's and '60's, through the
>     beginnings of the pocket wonders we have today, which had their roots in
>     the early 1970's, and on into the beginnings of the desktop computer of
>     the mid-1970's through the early 1980's.
>
>     For more information about the museum, please see the FAQ (Frequently
>     Asked Questions).
>
>     I'm always looking for old calculators of interest. If you have an old
>     machine which was made between 1950 and 1975, I may be interested in
>     making it a part of the museum. For more information about specific
>     machines I'm interested in acquiring for the museum, see my WANTED page
>     or click the "WANTED" section below. If you have a machine which seems
>     to fit these interests and are looking for a new home for it, please
>     drop me an EMail with information about the machine.


-- 
Cheers, Bev
   The people who don't know what they're doing and the people who
   don't realize it are generally the same people."       -- DAbel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15052

Rich wrote:

> <URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>
> 
> Quoting from the URL above:
> 
>    Welcome to the Old Calculator Web Museum. Let me introduce myself. I'm

Thanks for the information!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15056

On 2017-12-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
><URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>
>
> Quoting from the URL above:
>
>    The museum pages aren't fancy, focusing on content rather than flare.
>    This museum is simply devoted to preserving, documenting, and sharing
>    the technology of desktop automatic calculating machines -- from the
>    electro-mechanical calculators of the 1950's and '60's, through the
>    beginnings of the pocket wonders we have today, which had their roots in
>    the early 1970's, and on into the beginnings of the desktop computer of
>    the mid-1970's through the early 1980's.

Nice!  This is the kind of stuff I liked the best when I first got connected
to the 'Net: interesting individuals and their personal passions, catalogs
of the esoteric, and exposure to all sorts of interesting things I'd never
have found - or learned about - otherwise.

This new corporate www is boring by comparison.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15057

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> On 2017-12-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>><URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>
>>
>> Quoting from the URL above:
>>
>>    The museum pages aren't fancy, focusing on content rather than flare.
>>    This museum is simply devoted to preserving, documenting, and sharing
>>    the technology of desktop automatic calculating machines -- from the
>>    electro-mechanical calculators of the 1950's and '60's, through the
>>    beginnings of the pocket wonders we have today, which had their roots in
>>    the early 1970's, and on into the beginnings of the desktop computer of
>>    the mid-1970's through the early 1980's.
> 
> Nice!  This is the kind of stuff I liked the best when I first got connected
> to the 'Net: interesting individuals and their personal passions, catalogs
> of the esoteric, and exposure to all sorts of interesting things I'd never
> have found - or learned about - otherwise.

This web was by hobbyists/enthusiasts for hobbyists/enthusiasts.  It
was largely the whole 'point' of the web, and yes, it was often a much
more enjoyable and educational web.

> This new corporate www is boring by comparison.

This web's sole purpose is to monetize you in whatever way possible.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15058

On 2017-12-02, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
>> On 2017-12-01, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>><URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>
>>>
>>> Quoting from the URL above:
>>>
>>>    The museum pages aren't fancy, focusing on content rather than flare.
>>>    This museum is simply devoted to preserving, documenting, and sharing
>>>    the technology of desktop automatic calculating machines -- from the
>>>    electro-mechanical calculators of the 1950's and '60's, through the
>>>    beginnings of the pocket wonders we have today, which had their roots in
>>>    the early 1970's, and on into the beginnings of the desktop computer of
>>>    the mid-1970's through the early 1980's.
>> 
>> Nice!  This is the kind of stuff I liked the best when I first got connected
>> to the 'Net: interesting individuals and their personal passions, catalogs
>> of the esoteric, and exposure to all sorts of interesting things I'd never
>> have found - or learned about - otherwise.
>
> This web was by hobbyists/enthusiasts for hobbyists/enthusiasts.  It
> was largely the whole 'point' of the web, and yes, it was often a much
> more enjoyable and educational web.

Yes it was very enjoyable.  I also used to enjoy The Telegraph newspaper
(telegraph.co.uk) for its cross references; if you picked an article
involving an eveny in, say, Peru, which as a country doesn't get much
coverage in the Western press it would provide links to all other
Telegraph articles about Peru.  I'd never really understood the concept
of "web surfing" before discovering that, and here it was, crossing
subject boundaries in a way which really did expand your horizons.

Sadly that system of links got dropped with a rewrite of the web site.
They even had a good article at the time about how the rewrite improved
the journalists' workflow.  Sadly behind a paywall now, but those links
sections had already gone.

>> This new corporate www is boring by comparison.
>
> This web's sole purpose is to monetize you in whatever way possible.

I had this just the other day.  I was searching for firmware updates
for a new bit of kit, but all I was getting was more adverts for the
same kit:

a) I'm not the least bit interested in buying another until I've
   got the current one working and have had some time to see if
   it lives up to its promises

b) None of the prices shown was likely to match what I paid when
   I take postage, packaging and often-disadvantageous currency
   conversion rates into account.

-- 
Everybody has a testing environment. Some people are lucky enough to
have a totally separate environment to run production in.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15073

On 02/12/2017 08:59, Paul Sture wrote:
> On 2017-12-02, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

> Yes it was very enjoyable.  I also used to enjoy The Telegraph newspaper
> (telegraph.co.uk) for its cross references; if you picked an article
> involving an eveny in, say, Peru, which as a country doesn't get much
> coverage in the Western press it would provide links to all other
> Telegraph articles about Peru.  I'd never really understood the concept
> of "web surfing" before discovering that, and here it was, crossing
> subject boundaries in a way which really did expand your horizons.
> 
> Sadly that system of links got dropped with a rewrite of the web site.
> They even had a good article at the time about how the rewrite improved
> the journalists' workflow.  Sadly behind a paywall now, but those links
> sections had already gone.

One thing I find odd, given how simple it would be to implement 
technically, is news sites that include links to previous items on a 
story but they don't update the old articles with the forward link to 
the new one.

For example, a story about a car crash might start with the actual 
crash; then a day later name the injured parties; and perhaps a few 
weeks later include some coverage of a court case.

If you search and find a now historical item about a crash, it's often 
very hard to find out whether any court action took place, for example.

>>> This new corporate www is boring by comparison.
>>
>> This web's sole purpose is to monetize you in whatever way possible.
> 
> I had this just the other day.  I was searching for firmware updates
> for a new bit of kit, but all I was getting was more adverts for the
> same kit:
> 
> a) I'm not the least bit interested in buying another until I've
>     got the current one working and have had some time to see if
>     it lives up to its promises
> 

That's because Google^W the adslinger gets paid to show the 'product X' 
ad to anyone who has expressed an interest in 'product X'. The fact that 
their algorithms mark you as interested in 'product X' because you have 
already bought one is of no matter to them - it meets the T&C's it has 
agreed with the company that wants their advert shown so the the advert 
is shown.

I'm fairly sure this kind of behaviour annoys the people paying for 
their adverts to be shown just as much as it annoys you.

> b) None of the prices shown was likely to match what I paid when
>     I take postage, packaging and often-disadvantageous currency
>     conversion rates into account.
> 


-- 
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey
England
(bruce at scorecrow dot com)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15074

Bruce Horrocks <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
> On 02/12/2017 08:59, Paul Sture wrote:
>> On 2017-12-02, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> Yes it was very enjoyable.  I also used to enjoy The Telegraph newspaper
>> (telegraph.co.uk) for its cross references; if you picked an article
>> involving an eveny in, say, Peru, which as a country doesn't get much
>> coverage in the Western press it would provide links to all other
>> Telegraph articles about Peru.  I'd never really understood the concept
>> of "web surfing" before discovering that, and here it was, crossing
>> subject boundaries in a way which really did expand your horizons.
>> 
>> Sadly that system of links got dropped with a rewrite of the web site.
>> They even had a good article at the time about how the rewrite improved
>> the journalists' workflow.  Sadly behind a paywall now, but those links
>> sections had already gone.
> 
> One thing I find odd, given how simple it would be to implement 
> technically, is news sites that include links to previous items on a 
> story but they don't update the old articles with the forward link to 
> the new one.
> 
> For example, a story about a car crash might start with the actual 
> crash; then a day later name the injured parties; and perhaps a few 
> weeks later include some coverage of a court case.
> 
> If you search and find a now historical item about a crash, it's often 
> very hard to find out whether any court action took place, for example.

What I find odd as well is blog postings where the blogger writes a
multi-part article over the course of a few days or weeks, and at the
top of part X (where X >= 2) they say something to the effect of:

  Continuing our discussion from part X-1, we have now ...

And "part X-1" is /just text/.  Not a link back to the part X-1 of the
blog posting.

I'd give them a bit of leeway not updating part 1 to point at part 2
(being a blogger, a paid news org should do this linkage no matter
what), but it's lazy to not add a link to part 1 *in* part 2 while
writing part 2.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15087

On 2017-12-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> Bruce Horrocks <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
>> On 02/12/2017 08:59, Paul Sture wrote:
>>> On 2017-12-02, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> [snip]
>> 
>>> Yes it was very enjoyable.  I also used to enjoy The Telegraph newspaper
>>> (telegraph.co.uk) for its cross references; if you picked an article
>>> involving an eveny in, say, Peru, which as a country doesn't get much
>>> coverage in the Western press it would provide links to all other
>>> Telegraph articles about Peru.  I'd never really understood the concept
>>> of "web surfing" before discovering that, and here it was, crossing
>>> subject boundaries in a way which really did expand your horizons.
>>> 
>>> Sadly that system of links got dropped with a rewrite of the web site.
>>> They even had a good article at the time about how the rewrite improved
>>> the journalists' workflow.  Sadly behind a paywall now, but those links
>>> sections had already gone.
>> 
>> One thing I find odd, given how simple it would be to implement 
>> technically, is news sites that include links to previous items on a 
>> story but they don't update the old articles with the forward link to 
>> the new one.
>> 
>> For example, a story about a car crash might start with the actual 
>> crash; then a day later name the injured parties; and perhaps a few 
>> weeks later include some coverage of a court case.
>> 
>> If you search and find a now historical item about a crash, it's often 
>> very hard to find out whether any court action took place, for example.
>
> What I find odd as well is blog postings where the blogger writes a
> multi-part article over the course of a few days or weeks, and at the
> top of part X (where X >= 2) they say something to the effect of:
>
>   Continuing our discussion from part X-1, we have now ...
>
> And "part X-1" is /just text/.  Not a link back to the part X-1 of the
> blog posting.

I had an example of that just last week.  It was quite annoying - I had
to go to the home page and hope that I'd find it easily.  I did, but
that's not the point.

> I'd give them a bit of leeway not updating part 1 to point at part 2
> (being a blogger, a paid news org should do this linkage no matter
> what), but it's lazy to not add a link to part 1 *in* part 2 while
> writing part 2.

I could sorta kinda see an argument that the author wants readers to go
to the home page (a bit like the old thing where many sites didn't like
"deep linking" aka going direct to an article), but that is counter
productive for any but the determined reader.

-- 
Everybody has a testing environment. Some people are lucky enough to
have a totally separate environment to run production in.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15091

Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
> On 2017-12-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>> Bruce Horrocks <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
>>> On 02/12/2017 08:59, Paul Sture wrote:
>>>> On 2017-12-02, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>> [snip]
>>> 
>>>> Yes it was very enjoyable.  I also used to enjoy The Telegraph newspaper
>>>> (telegraph.co.uk) for its cross references; if you picked an article
>>>> involving an eveny in, say, Peru, which as a country doesn't get much
>>>> coverage in the Western press it would provide links to all other
>>>> Telegraph articles about Peru.  I'd never really understood the concept
>>>> of "web surfing" before discovering that, and here it was, crossing
>>>> subject boundaries in a way which really did expand your horizons.
>>>> 
>>>> Sadly that system of links got dropped with a rewrite of the web site.
>>>> They even had a good article at the time about how the rewrite improved
>>>> the journalists' workflow.  Sadly behind a paywall now, but those links
>>>> sections had already gone.
>>> 
>>> One thing I find odd, given how simple it would be to implement 
>>> technically, is news sites that include links to previous items on a 
>>> story but they don't update the old articles with the forward link to 
>>> the new one.
>>> 
>>> For example, a story about a car crash might start with the actual 
>>> crash; then a day later name the injured parties; and perhaps a few 
>>> weeks later include some coverage of a court case.
>>> 
>>> If you search and find a now historical item about a crash, it's often 
>>> very hard to find out whether any court action took place, for example.
>>
>> What I find odd as well is blog postings where the blogger writes a
>> multi-part article over the course of a few days or weeks, and at the
>> top of part X (where X >= 2) they say something to the effect of:
>>
>>   Continuing our discussion from part X-1, we have now ...
>>
>> And "part X-1" is /just text/.  Not a link back to the part X-1 of the
>> blog posting.
> 
> I had an example of that just last week.  It was quite annoying - I had
> to go to the home page and hope that I'd find it easily.  I did, but
> that's not the point.

I've encountered blog posts where the only way they provide to find
part 1 is via the home page, then they either 1) omit a link to the
home page from the article I landed upon (big no-no here) or 2) when I
got to the home page, there was no way to find individual articles
beyond a (next) link at the bottom of the newest three posts.

I leave at those points, and I don't usually return.

>> I'd give them a bit of leeway not updating part 1 to point at part 2
>> (being a blogger, a paid news org should do this linkage no matter
>> what), but it's lazy to not add a link to part 1 *in* part 2 while
>> writing part 2.
> 
> I could sorta kinda see an argument that the author wants readers to go
> to the home page (a bit like the old thing where many sites didn't like
> "deep linking" aka going direct to an article), but that is counter
> productive for any but the determined reader.

Ah, yes, the SEO and "user engagement" arguments.  I can see the
blogger getting into that mindset, and esp.  if their reason for
blogging is "ad revenue" from ad impressions instead of "enjoyment". 
Still not a good reason to lack a link back to part one when the text
says "this is a continuation of part 1 from last week".

The other really irritating one is 'news' sites that intentionally
break up an often short article into 7 parts, for the sole purpose of
boosting their ad impressions.  Sometimes those sites do have a
somewhat hidden "all in one" link, and if one clicks through to the
all-in-one article, it is only about two screen heights anyway, which
smells very badly of "break into 7 parts for ad impression boosting" as
the sole reason.

Of course, the fact that I don't see the ads (ads have been blocked
here for as long as web ad blockers have existed) means their attempt
failed anyway.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15088

On 2017-12-03, Bruce Horrocks <07.013@scorecrow.com> wrote:
> On 02/12/2017 08:59, Paul Sture wrote:
>> On 2017-12-02, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Yes it was very enjoyable.  I also used to enjoy The Telegraph newspaper
>> (telegraph.co.uk) for its cross references; if you picked an article
>> involving an eveny in, say, Peru, which as a country doesn't get much
>> coverage in the Western press it would provide links to all other
>> Telegraph articles about Peru.  I'd never really understood the concept
>> of "web surfing" before discovering that, and here it was, crossing
>> subject boundaries in a way which really did expand your horizons.
>> 
>> Sadly that system of links got dropped with a rewrite of the web site.
>> They even had a good article at the time about how the rewrite improved
>> the journalists' workflow.  Sadly behind a paywall now, but those links
>> sections had already gone.
>
> One thing I find odd, given how simple it would be to implement 
> technically, is news sites that include links to previous items on a 
> story but they don't update the old articles with the forward link to 
> the new one.
>
> For example, a story about a car crash might start with the actual 
> crash; then a day later name the injured parties; and perhaps a few 
> weeks later include some coverage of a court case.
>
> If you search and find a now historical item about a crash, it's often 
> very hard to find out whether any court action took place, for example.

That's a good example.  It leaves you wanting more, without any clues
how to get there.

>>>> This new corporate www is boring by comparison.
>>>
>>> This web's sole purpose is to monetize you in whatever way possible.
>> 
>> I had this just the other day.  I was searching for firmware updates
>> for a new bit of kit, but all I was getting was more adverts for the
>> same kit:
>> 
>> a) I'm not the least bit interested in buying another until I've
>>     got the current one working and have had some time to see if
>>     it lives up to its promises
>> 
>
> That's because Google^W the adslinger gets paid to show the 'product X' 
> ad to anyone who has expressed an interest in 'product X'. The fact that 
> their algorithms mark you as interested in 'product X' because you have 
> already bought one is of no matter to them - it meets the T&C's it has 
> agreed with the company that wants their advert shown so the the advert 
> is shown.

DuckDuckGo in my case, but point taken.  I probably stick out like a
sore thumb via some combination of IP address geolocation, using a
Mac and using English as my default language (I live in a German
speaking area).

> I'm fairly sure this kind of behaviour annoys the people paying for 
> their adverts to be shown just as much as it annoys you.

I imagine it will prompt some folks to go back and review a product
they have bought, so perhaps not all is a waste.

-- 
Everybody has a testing environment. Some people are lucky enough to
have a totally separate environment to run production in.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15060

Rich quoted:

> <URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>
>     The museum pages aren't fancy, focusing on content rather than flare.
>     This museum is simply devoted to preserving, documenting, and sharing
>     the technology of desktop automatic calculating machines 

He doesn't have an example of the first blow to my mental arithmetic

<https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ROCKWELL-24RD-CALCULATOR/221157075248>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15157

On 12/01/2017 03:56 PM, Rich wrote:
> <URL:http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/>
> 
> Quoting from the URL above:
> 
>     Welcome to the Old Calculator Web Museum. Let me introduce myself. I'm
>     Rick Bensene, the curator of this museum. I'm 57, live in a rural area
>     outside of Oregon City, Oregon USA (near the end of the Oregon Trail),
>     called Beavercreek, and am a computing/ network/telecommunications
>     professional. I've been a fan of all kinds of technology since I was a
>     youngster in the mid-1960's.
> 
>     The museum pages aren't fancy, focusing on content rather than flare.
>     This museum is simply devoted to preserving, documenting, and sharing
>     the technology of desktop automatic calculating machines -- from the
>     electro-mechanical calculators of the 1950's and '60's, through the
>     beginnings of the pocket wonders we have today, which had their roots in
>     the early 1970's, and on into the beginnings of the desktop computer of
>     the mid-1970's through the early 1980's.
> 
>     For more information about the museum, please see the FAQ (Frequently
>     Asked Questions).
> 
>     I'm always looking for old calculators of interest. If you have an old
>     machine which was made between 1950 and 1975, I may be interested in
>     making it a part of the museum. For more information about specific
>     machines I'm interested in acquiring for the museum, see my WANTED page
>     or click the "WANTED" section below. If you have a machine which seems
>     to fit these interests and are looking for a new home for it, please
>     drop me an EMail with information about the machine.
> 
>     ...
> 



I still have my Radio Shack EC-450 from about 1975

It it uses a 4004 CPU   I am sure this is a collector's item of some sort.

Had to replace the nicads once but otherwise it's good except for a 
slightly sticky key which existed almost since new.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web