From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

I have 2 pieces of software which I will probably need to be able to run for the rest of my life, or at least for many-many years to come, and neither run on intel Macs and one of them runs semi-perfectly only on G5s. Hence, I need
to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say, 25 years, although G5
is also a possibility.

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

Thanks, PaulN


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <e1lt1l$rp6$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, 2me@PaulComputing.com wrote:

I have 2 pieces of software which I will probably need to be able to run for the rest of my life, or at least for many-many years to come, and neither run on intel Macs and one of them runs semi-perfectly only on G5s. Hence, I need to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say, 25 years, although G5 is also a possibility.

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

Switch to other software that can do the job, because no hardware will
last more than a few years these days, nor will it in the future. :-)

What kind of software is this, that isn't updated, can only run on Mac's
G5's, can't be recompiled, nor run on Intel Macs under Rosetta emulation
mode?

--
Hans Aberg
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2006-04-13, Paul Nevai <2me@PaulComputing.com> wrote:

I have 2 pieces of software which I will probably need to be able to run for the rest of my life, or at least for many-many years to come, and neither run on intel Macs and one of them runs semi-perfectly only on G5s. Hence, I need to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say, 25 years, although G5 is also a possibility.

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

25 years!!!

In that case, do not spend a single penny on hardware. Instead, save
your money to pay a developer to write applications for you which
provide the necessary functionality. Specify that the applications
should be written to use open standards and supplied to you as C
source code. Also ask for full documentation of the design (flow
charts etc) so that if C has fallen into disuse in 24 years they
can be easily recoded.

Ian

--
Ian Gregory
http://www.zenatode.org.uk/ian/
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <e1lt1l$rp6$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, Paul Nevai <2me@PaulComputing.com> wrote:

What would be the best strategy?

Replace the software and spend the money miigrating the legacy data.
What software is this, anyway?
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) aszonygya:
:In article <e1lt1l$rp6$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, :2me@PaulComputing.com wrote:
:

I have 2 pieces of software which I will probably need to be able to run for the rest of my life, or at least for many-many years to come, and neither run
on intel Macs and one of them runs semi-perfectly only on G5s. Hence, I need to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say, 25 years, although G5 is also a possibility.

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you
have any better suggestions? What and how many?

:
:Switch to other software that can do the job, because no hardware will
:last more than a few years these days, nor will it in the future. :-)

I could switch but I won't. MYM runs only on classic and it is the perfect financial software which I have been using for 15+ years. This has been discussed before and the concensus was to keep a Mac just for MYM.

:What kind of software is this, that isn't updated, can only run on Mac's :G5's, can't be recompiled, nor run on Intel Macs under Rosetta emulation :mode?

The Palm version of MetroWerks [unless someone can recompile for me which is most unlikely]. It runs on G3-G5.

/PaulN
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Ian Gregory wrote:

On 2006-04-13, Paul Nevai <2me@PaulComputing.com> wrote:

I have 2 pieces of software which I will probably need to be able to run for >>the rest of my life, or at least for many-many years to come, and neither run >>on intel Macs and one of them runs semi-perfectly only on G5s. Hence, I need >>to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say, 25 years, although G5 >>is also a possibility.

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you >>have any better suggestions? What and how many?

25 years!!!

In that case, do not spend a single penny on hardware. Instead, save
your money to pay a developer to write applications for you which
provide the necessary functionality. Specify that the applications
should be written to use open standards and supplied to you as C
source code. Also ask for full documentation of the design (flow
charts etc) so that if C has fallen into disuse in 24 years they
can be easily recoded.

25 years sounds like a long time but it really isn't - there are plenty
of > 25 year old systems which still run fine today (e.g. Apple ][). The
main problems in the long term will tend to be mechanical components
(disk drives, fans, keyboards, etc) and anything which may have a
limited lifetime (both CRT and LCD screens come under thsi category).

I'd suggest getting a few of the most recent G4 towers plus some spare
parts (disk drives, keyboards, mice, monitors, etc) and mothball the
spares and any machines that are not needed in the short term in a
clean, dry environment where the temperature is stable.

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Paul Nevai <2me@PaulComputing.com> wrote:

I have 2 pieces of software which I will probably need to be able to run for the rest of my life, or at least for many-many years to come, and neither run on intel Macs and one of them runs semi-perfectly only on G5s. Hence, I need to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say, 25 years, although G5 is also a possibility.

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

You will not be able to keep any current electronic device running for
25 years without at least some maintenance -- replacing capacitors, etc.
For a computer, which depends on rapidly changing technologies, this
will be even harder. In twenty (or even ten) years, will you be able to
find an ATA drive or a PCI card?

In any case, eMacs or any other models with built-in displays are a very
poor choice for what you want to do. I suggest you become an eBay
regular and start acquiring a stable of PowerMac G4s. You could store
them in your bomb shelter.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Paul Nevai wrote:

I have 2 pieces of software which I will probably need to be able to run for the rest of my life, or at least for many-many years to come, and neither run on intel Macs and one of them runs semi-perfectly only on G5s. Hence, I need to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say, 25 years, although G5 is also a possibility.

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

Would it help us answer your questions if we knew the names of these
two pieces of software? 5-10 years is nothing in dog years, but 25 is a
lot of dog years.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Paul Russell <prussell@sonic.net> wrote:

25 years sounds like a long time but it really isn't - there are plenty
of > 25 year old systems which still run fine today (e.g. Apple ][).

Being able to find isolated individual systems that still run after that
long is worlds different from being able to count on a particular system
doing so. It is the difference between "it could happen in rare cases"
versus "it will very likely happen".

I actually happen to still have an Apple IIe (sold my II+ when I got the
IIe). It worked last time I powered it up, which was less than a year
ago. But I also invested in a copy of Virtual II, mostly for the
nostalgia value (and it prompted me to play with Bard's Tale a little,
as that's one game I recalled spending time on a few decades ago). With
Virtual II, I can run programs without putting strain on the old
hardware - particularly the floppy drives and my old floppy media.

I'd suggest getting a few of the most recent G4 towers plus some spare
parts (disk drives, keyboards, mice, monitors, etc) and mothball the
spares and any machines that are not needed in the short term in a
clean, dry environment where the temperature is stable.

Exceptions no doubt exist, but I would not expect hard disk drives to
take well to "mothballing". Spindles get stuck, etc. You actually do
better if you spin the thing up every so often - not enough to put a lot
of wear on it, but enough to spread the lubricants around and avoid
other stiction issues. A lot like an old car, and for much the same
reasons. It will probably be in better shape if that proverbial little
old lady from Pasadena did drive it to church once a month or so.

--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: my first.last at org.domain| experience comes from bad judgment.
org: nasa, domain: gov | -- Mark Twain
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <e1m0bm$rv8$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, nevai@math.ohio-state.edu (Paul Nevai) wrote:

:Switch to other software that can do the job, because no hardware will
:last more than a few years these days, nor will it in the future. :-)

I could switch but I won't. MYM runs only on classic and it is the perfect financial software which I have been using for 15+ years. This has been discussed before and the concensus was to keep a Mac just for MYM.

I have encountered a similar situation, some scripting software, that a
lot of Hollywood people seemed to use, and therefore others,
only available for Mac OS 9. A check of this software, seemed to suggest that development of it had been dropped. So I looked for other software,
and there was some much better ones for Mac OS X available.

So I suggest you to do the same: Software that isn't developed is not
worth having. Consider the migration problems. It could be that the
software you are looking for is not yet here. Then use the one you have,
until the right software shows up. But if your current software isn't
developed anymore, it's time to drop it. There few exceptions of this for commercial software, as such software is usually hacked together, with a
lot of bugs and limitations. (A non-commercial program, that is not
developed anymore is TeX, which is a standard in some technical
typesetting, such as math, but its sources are open, and one can freely develope ones own version of it, as folks also do. Commercial,
undeveloped, closed software, is moribund.)

--
Hans Aberg
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <e1m0bm$rv8$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
nevai@math.ohio-state.edu (Paul Nevai) wrote:

haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) aszonygya:
:
:Switch to other software that can do the job, because no hardware will
:last more than a few years these days, nor will it in the future. :-)

I could switch but I won't. MYM runs only on classic and it is the perfect financial software which I have been using for 15+ years. This has been discussed before and the concensus was to keep a Mac just for MYM.

What does MYM say is the long term cost for such a decision? It's just numbers, Paul, and other software running on newer hardware can feed up
the same numbers. Other than stubborn refusal, you make no case in
favor of MYM being a future noose around your neck.

:What kind of software is this, that isn't updated, can only run on Mac's :G5's, can't be recompiled, nor run on Intel Macs under Rosetta emulation :mode?

The Palm version of MetroWerks [unless someone can recompile for me which is most unlikely]. It runs on G3-G5.

So what is it you're really looking to do here? You need to get past
the software and say what problem you're trying to solve. If you want
to do Palm development, I'm sure that there are still plenty of
solutions, all best discussed in a Palm group (although a quick Google
search easily turns up <http://www.palmos.com/dev/tools/gcc/>).

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, x-privat.org
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <e1lt1l$rp6$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
2me@PaulComputing.com (Paul Nevai) wrote:

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

You're not going to find any hardware by anyone which will run for 25
years. Your best strategy is to make sure you have control of the apps
you need, assuming you're using them for a business.

--
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams,
Wandering by lone sea-breakers, And sitting by desolate streams.
from "Ode", Arthur O'Shaughnessy
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

* Paul Nevai [04/13/2006 16:08 UTC]:

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs.
Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

This thread is looking a lot like the last one you started with the same question. The fact is, your expectations are unrealistic... as many
others have said.

--
-=Elden=-
http://www.moondog.org

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Paul Nevai wrote:

Hence, I need to stock up on some G4 Macs which would last me, say,
25 years. . .

I do hereby nominate this as the silliest albeit possibly unintentional
troll of the last quarter century. Seconds?

What would be the best strategy? I am thinking of buying a few eMacs. Do you have any better suggestions? What and how many?

Best strategy remains a 50' lead-lined reefer of assorted G4 and G5s
parked in NORADs long term parking lot 5150.

Dude, at some point in the not too distant future you will just have to
re-key in all the data from your dead app into one that will take you
into the future.
J
ust pay someone to do it -- your alternative strategy is, to be kind,
kookie as heck.

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) aszonygya:
:lot of bugs and limitations. (A non-commercial program, that is not
:developed anymore is TeX, which is a standard in some technical
:typesetting, such as math, but its sources are open, and one can freely :develope ones own version of it, as folks also do. Commercial,

I never heard of a "folks modified" TeX. You are probably thinking of add-on packages [macros] such as LaTeX. Right? /PaulN
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Doc O'Leary <droleary.usenet@2q2006.subsume.com> aszonygya:
:What does MYM say is the long term cost for such a decision? It's just :numbers, Paul, and other software running on newer hardware can feed up
:the same numbers. Other than stubborn refusal, you make no case in
:favor of MYM being a future noose around your neck.

The problem is much deeper. What about the gazillion numbers which are in my current MYM DB? E.g., my phone bill in 11/1992? What will happen to that if
I start using a new finacial package? Do you see how complicated the issue
is?

In addition, if I switch, then I need to be prepared to switch on a regular basis.

/PaulN

P.S. I have been using emacs for about 20 years and I know that emacs will
stay with me for the rest of my life. So will TeX and gawk and sed.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> aszonygya:
:You're not going to find any hardware by anyone which will run for 25
:years. Your best strategy is to make sure you have control of the apps
:you need, assuming you're using them for a business.

You might be right but my NeXT cube has been running for 16 years now. Of course, all the internal drives have long been dead and I had to replace the monitor once but it still works. /PaulN

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Paul Nevai wrote:

I could switch but I won't. MYM runs only on classic and it is the
perfect financial software which I have been using for 15+ years.
This has been discussed before and the concensus was to keep a Mac
just for MYM.

If that was the consensus then either you didn't mention that 25 year thing
so people couldn't really judge, or you were speaking to kooks. Plain fact: Any consumer grade computer that is around now and can keep going for the
next 25 years will be down to a matter of luck. If this is for a business
you actually care about then you should know better than to bet the whole thing on a totally avoidable bit of luck.


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Elden Fenison <usenet@moondog.org> aszonygya:
:This thread is looking a lot like the last one you started with the same :question. The fact is, your expectations are unrealistic... as many
:others have said.

I apologize for restarting the thread but things have changed lately: Apple moved to intel. So the resolution of the problem became more urgent. /PaulN


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <e1o88p$3q1$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, nevai@math.ohio-state.edu (Paul Nevai) wrote:

:lot of bugs and limitations. (A non-commercial program, that is not :developed anymore is TeX, which is a standard in some technical :typesetting, such as math, but its sources are open, and one can freely :develope ones own version of it, as folks also do. Commercial,

I never heard of a "folks modified" TeX. You are probably thinking of add-on packages [macros] such as LaTeX. Right? /PaulN

No, there are lots of different successor candidates to TeX around. Omega
is one; see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_(TeX)>. There are several others. One candidate, I think, attempts to simplify the stuff one
attempts to do in LaTeX3. A problem in this context is to give such a
successor some de facto standard statues, as the original TeX is no longer being developed.

--
Hans Aberg
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

haberg@math.su.se (Hans Aberg) aszonygya:
:No, there are lots of different successor candidates to TeX around. Omega
:is one; see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_(TeX)>. There are several :others. One candidate, I think, attempts to simplify the stuff one
:attempts to do in LaTeX3. A problem in this context is to give such a :successor some de facto standard statues, as the original TeX is no longer :being developed.

I see. It's very interesting. I always used normal TeX, AMSTeX, and LaTeX so
I didn't know about these. Thanks for the info. /PaulN
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <e1o8l9$3qf$1@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
nevai@math.ohio-state.edu (Paul Nevai) wrote:

Doc O'Leary <droleary.usenet@2q2006.subsume.com> aszonygya:
:What does MYM say is the long term cost for such a decision? It's just :numbers, Paul, and other software running on newer hardware can feed up :the same numbers. Other than stubborn refusal, you make no case in
:favor of MYM being a future noose around your neck.

The problem is much deeper. What about the gazillion numbers which are in my current MYM DB? E.g., my phone bill in 11/1992? What will happen to that if I start using a new finacial package? Do you see how complicated the issue is?

No, I don't. What I see is that you're swamped in the quagmire of
vendor lock-in. The solution is not to prolong the situation for
another 25 years, it's to get the data, *your* data, back from MYM such
that it is useful to you in the future. The biggest issue you face is
that you may have stuck with their proprietary format for longer than
the people who write conversion software, but adding years to that by stockpiling old Macs doesn't really solve your problem.

In addition, if I switch, then I need to be prepared to switch on a regular basis.

Yes, you do! That should be the plan, anyway. Your broken logic sounds
very similar to "But if I back up my data now, I'll have to keep backing
it up every week." Yes, yes you should. If this financial data you
have is so very important to you in the future, you need to have a plan
to take it into the future. Crossing your fingers and hoping hardware
doesn't crap out when it's antique is *not* a reasonable plan.

P.S. I have been using emacs for about 20 years and I know that emacs will stay with me for the rest of my life. So will TeX and gawk and sed.

Good for them, but that simply supports my point that open formats and
open standards last long after proprietary solutions dry up. You might
want to look into GnuCash <http://www.gnucash.org/> as your replacement
to MYM. It may not be as slick as some of the GUI alternatives (in the
same way that emacs isn't as pretty as TextEdit), but the odds of your
data becoming inaccessible slip to about nil.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, x-privat.org
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <uJN%f.18816$ic1.2891@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>,
"Robert Moir" <robspamtrap+usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

Paul Nevai wrote:

I could switch but I won't. MYM runs only on classic and it is the
perfect financial software which I have been using for 15+ years.
This has been discussed before and the concensus was to keep a Mac
just for MYM.

If that was the consensus then either you didn't mention that 25 year thing so people couldn't really judge, or you were speaking to kooks. Plain fact: Any consumer grade computer that is around now and can keep going for the next 25 years will be down to a matter of luck. If this is for a business you actually care about then you should know better than to bet the whole thing on a totally avoidable bit of luck.

I was told there's a standard practice to destroying records older than
7 years (except stuff like your deed to your house, records of the
long-term capital you're still holding, etc). Unless you have some contractual requirement to keep old records beyond 7 years, why are you cluttering your life with this minutia (and worrying about having to
carry it to the grave)? Do you have to comply with Sorbaines-Oxley?

Tapes, floppies, and a papertape BASIC compiler from my DEC-20 and VAX
days were dumped some time ago (I kept the TECO book for nostalgia). I
feel lighter just thinking about it.

Instead of trying to stockpile hardware, why not pay someone to convert
all the old records to ASCII, print them out on acid-free paper and
india ink, burn CDs, write tapes of the data? Then you can go forward
with whatever the future holds free of any sort of computer requirement.

[silly rabbit, kicks are for trids...]

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...



--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

* Michael Vilain [04/14/2006 19:31 UTC]:

Instead of trying to stockpile hardware, why not pay someone to
convert all the old records to ASCII, print them out on acid-free
paper and india ink, burn CDs, write tapes of the data? Then you can
go forward with whatever the future holds free of any sort of computer requirement.

I think this is the best idea yet. Get that data onto some form of hard
copy and start fresh. Then, when you move to a new financial program all
you'll need to enter are the beginning balances.

--
-=Elden=-
http://www.moondog.org

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <uJN%f.18816$ic1.2891@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>,
Robert Moir <robspamtrap+usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

Paul Nevai wrote:

I could switch but I won't. MYM runs only on classic and it is the
perfect financial software which I have been using for 15+ years.
This has been discussed before and the concensus was to keep a Mac
just for MYM.

If that was the consensus then either you didn't mention that 25 year thing >so people couldn't really judge, or you were speaking to kooks. Plain fact: >Any consumer grade computer that is around now and can keep going for the >next 25 years will be down to a matter of luck. If this is for a business >you actually care about then you should know better than to bet the whole >thing on a totally avoidable bit of luck.

But if he's really stuck on that program, there are Mac _emulators_.
By the time his current machine dies, there may be one fast enough to
run that program at a reasonable speed.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Matthew Russotto wrote:

In article <uJN%f.18816$ic1.2891@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>,
Robert Moir <robspamtrap+usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

Paul Nevai wrote:

I could switch but I won't. MYM runs only on classic and it is the
perfect financial software which I have been using for 15+ years.
This has been discussed before and the concensus was to keep a Mac
just for MYM.

If that was the consensus then either you didn't mention that 25
year thing so people couldn't really judge, or you were speaking to
kooks. Plain fact: Any consumer grade computer that is around now
and can keep going for the next 25 years will be down to a matter of
luck. If this is for a business you actually care about then you
should know better than to bet the whole thing on a totally
avoidable bit of luck.

But if he's really stuck on that program, there are Mac _emulators_.
By the time his current machine dies, there may be one fast enough to
run that program at a reasonable speed.

Or there may not be. Again, the point is that you're talking about placing a bet. Avoidable risks like that are not a good strategy to base a business upon.


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


Neill Massello wrote:

You will not be able to keep any current electronic device running for
25 years without at least some maintenance -- replacing capacitors, etc.

Inaccurately stated. It is _unlikely_ that any _specific_ computer
today will be functional in 25 years without some ongoing maintenance.
However in aggregate, assuming these Luddite hardware recycling
programs don't gather everything into the net, we can expect that
_some_ of today's machines will still be operable in 2031.

I have hardware that is ~25 years old (VIC-20s) and is fully operable,
despite never having been maintained. It all depends on environmental conditions, design margins and simply dumb luck - where each component
is on the bathtub curve.

Given that modern manufacturing processes are quite tightly controlled,
and design margins are calculated quite accurately, I suspect the OP
would have to mothball a large number of systems in order to be
reasonably certain that one of the collection will power up
successfully in 2031.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 13/04/2006, Ian Gregory wrote in message
<4a7e6fFrqn8mU1@individual.net>:

25 years!!!

In that case, do not spend a single penny on hardware. Instead, save
your money to pay a developer to write applications for you which
provide the necessary functionality.

Agreed. Even if you are able to keep a computer working that long it
won't talk to anything. Do you need to be able to print from that
application ? If so, you need to keep a compatible printer (and then you
need compatible ink cartridges). Do you need to be able to take backups ? You'll need to keep some sort of compatible backup system (FireWire hard
disk ?).

It's hopeless. Find a migration path to something else. If necessary, as
Ian wrote, get some written for you. It'll be far cheaper than trying to
keep obsolete equipment running.

As to eMacs, don't bother. They're basically portable Macs built around integral CRT displays. Half won't be working in ten years, and they use
so much electricity they'll probably be banned in 25 years anyway.

Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Hi Paul,

The most versital G4 systems are the modular ones. Stay away from
closed systems like eMacs and iMacs.

The Quicksliver 2002 series is fully upgradeable via 100% compatible (regardless of Apple Marketing untruths) CPU upgrades, and can handle
the latest AGP cards as well. It has plenty of headroom on RAM and can
also handle the larger drives without extra cards.

While the MDDs seem like good systems, they are stuck on CPU upgrades
and present a number of challenges for upgrade vendors.

Daystar can build custom refurb systems if you need an integration
specialist.

Gary Dailey
Daystar Technology
The Mac Performance Shop
http://daystar-store.com http://daystar-tech.com

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Hi!

I wonder if emulation of the "classic" Macintosh environment/computing
hardware would help solve your problem. There do exist software
packages that do this...SheepShaver being one that comes to mind. (It
will run at least Mac OS 9.0.4 per what I saw on their web site.
However, I didn't see a version for the Intel Macs...that doesn't mean
it wouldn't run on Rosetta though...)

Depending upon what your software demands, Basilisk II is another
emulator that might do all you need. It doesn't emulate the PowerPC
CPU, which could be a problem.

That said, most computer hardware is very, very reliable and runs for
many years after it is obsolete. Twenty years wouldn't necessarily be
too much to expect out of the mainboard and other stuff. My biggest
concern would be hard disk troubles...and freak accidents that damage components you might not be able to get at some time in the future. I
have a large number of IBM PS/2s that are still running well, and some
are getting to the 20 year mark (1987-2007)...some even with their
original hard disks and batteries working very nicely. I use one (out
of many) as a Token Ring LAN bridge.

(I know someone who is still using a Macintosh Performa on a daily
basis. The only service it has needed so far is a replacement hard
disk...the original worked, but was suffering from stiction problems.
If nothing else, this is just another example that says you
can...bearing in mind the above considerations about replacement
parts.)

Some other thoughts: Does the program you have now offer an export
function to something like a CSV file?

Would the program print all your data from the time you began using it
until now? This would be a lot less convenient than looking up the data
on computer, and it would likely use up a lot of paper, but then you'd
have the data for as long as people can still read. (Plus, you'd be
able to microfilm or duplicate it.)

William

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113