• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Defining Eras of Vintage

L

lyonadmiral

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
2,430
Location
Peru, New York
I was just reading a thread up in the Pentium forum in which the OP asked if Pentium MMX counted as vintage, and then another poster commented that they thought that vintage was a moving target. I guess if you liken technology to automobiles once it hits a certain age then it could be considered vintage. I'd like to know if there are different eras of vintage or should there be.

In my own mind I look at it like this...

1977-1984 8-bit Era
1985-1994 16-bit Era
1995-2005 32-bit Era
2005->64 bit Era

thoughts?
 
lyonadmiral said:
I was just reading a thread up in the Pentium forum in which the OP asked if Pentium MMX counted as vintage, and then another poster commented that they thought that vintage was a moving target. I guess if you liken technology to automobiles once it hits a certain age then it could be considered vintage. I'd like to know if there are different eras of vintage or should there be.

In my own mind I look at it like this...

1977-1984 8-bit Era
1985-1994 16-bit Era
1995-2005 32-bit Era
2005->64 bit Era

thoughts?
Click to expand...

For home computers only.
 
Yes vintage of this era or that era is the appropriate way to look at it. vintage 8-bit Atari from early 80's is a specific "vintage" or just 8-bit era vintage to mean the home computers from the mid-70's to the mid 80's primarily. There are vintage mini and mainframe types too, vintage by use (a vintage early www GUI interface), it's up to the circumstances.

I think at this point there is a consensus that you can't just say "vintage computers" to mean every computer from some arbitrary cut-off date any more.

b
 
I personally don't like the word vintage with regards to computers. I do like the era designation as stated above though. I prefer "classic" and possibly "retro".

Vintage always makes me think of wine.
 
I think it's subjective and there is no definitive answer. Kind of like asking at what age is someone "old"?
 
They're "obsolete" but that doesn't sound great. "Retro" means an imitation. "Classic" means typical of its type, which is probably the best description.
 
Warning: Opinions ahead.

It is easiest to just pick a cut-off date and be done with it. For me, anything 20 years old or older is vintage, full stop. No debating, no arguments; most non-collectors have no trouble understanding this. As time marches onward, so does the year something can be considered vintage. In the year 2020, systems from Y2K will be considered vintage (because they will be!).

I don't think it is useful to define "eras" because there are always outliers that get people arguing. For example, here's a few that are hard to classify (and no, I am not looking for anyone to start arguing about these):

- The IBM PC is a 16-bit CPU with an 8-bit data bus. So is it a 16-bit system or an 8-bit system?
- The TurboGrafx-16 is a console with an 8-bit CPU and a 16-bit graphics processor. So does it belong to the 8-bit console "era" (NES, Colecovision, SMS, etc.) or 16-bit "era" (SNES, Genesis, etc.)?
- The Atari Lynx is a hand-held console with an 8-bit CPU, a 16-bit graphics process, and a 32-bit math co-processor (multiplies can have 32-bit result, can divide 32-bit numbers). So where does it belong?
- The Atari Jaguar is a console with a 16-bit general-purpose CPU, two 32-bit RISC CPUs, a 64-bit graphics processor, and 64-bit bus. So...?

So defining hard year cut-offs for these things never work well, that's too simple. I guess you could define overlapping ranges, sure, but not hard cut-offs.
 
To me home computing started in the 70's and each decade since then has seem quite a few major changes in designs. Sooner or later things will stagnate and a 20 year cutoff date will start to get meaningless.

I think you have to look at software as well as the hardware. To me PC computing had major changes in the DOS to 16 bit windows era and the switch from W9x to the Win2k era. X64 wasn't that big of a deal.

These days with everything running on Intel or AMD you could argue any system that can't run Windows is vintage.


For me current computing is whatever I can get work done on, vintage would be obsolete but still interesting to me, and classic is so old even I don't care about it.
 
Just on the DOS/Windows Perspective of things - I've always split it up this way - with overlapping eras.....

1981-1983 - Early PC-DOS & Semi-Compatibles (the break for this era is the Compaq Portable)
1983-1987 - the XT Class Era (8088/80186/8086 based PC's with max 640K RAM and CGA/EGA Graphics)
1984-1991 - The AT Class Era (80286 based PC's with CGA/EGA/VGA and possibly a sound card, running DOS)
1986-1993 - The 386 Era (80386 based PC's running with EGA/VGA/SVGA and possibly a soundcard under DOS or Windows 3.x)

And then I split the 486 era into distinct yet somewhat overlapping era...because that genre is not exactly dead yet tbh.
1989-1991 - The Socket 1 era, ie 486 DX 33 MHz being king, ISA only BUS, VGA being standard video, soundcard optional
1991-1992 - The Socket 2 era, 486 DX2-66 being king, ISA, EISA, and VLB come along, Soundcard somewhat optional but preferred
1992-1994 - The EARLY Socket 3 eara, 486 DX2 and DX4, Overdrive Chips, VLB becomes more common, Soundcards are standard, 528MB Limit broken
1994-1997 - The Late 486 Era, which includes DX4's, AMD 5x86, Overdrives, PCI busses, and massive VLSI
1997-present - The Industrial Era of SBC 486 based systems which continues today - most of those have features supported by modern systems and most of the circuitry is embedeed into the 486-derived CPU chip much like a modern core series CPU. Most of these run industrial equipment though like laser engravers and whatnot but can be preened to function as a DOS Desktop PC.
 
As trixter has mentioned, the goalposts are moving as we speak. My problem with that however is we eventually encroach into later generations of computers where between brands they become extremely similar or the technologies they use have changed little in the following years. I have issues telling people with a straight face that a Commodore 64 is as vintage as a dual Pentium Pro machine. It's two entirely different generations of hardware.

It's like how here in BC you can own a 1980 Corvette and have Collector plates on it, but then I pull up next to you in a 1992 Geo Tracker with collector plates as well because the car is technically past the 25 year requirement.
Two MASSIVELY different cars in every possible way, yet both are technically "vintage".
 
Last edited:
Strictly speaking, what's "vintage" mean?

Well, it derives from winemaking and is literally the year of the wine's production (hence the "vin" part). Not old or good, just the year. So "Vintage 2016" is as much vintage as "Vintage 1948".

Talking about a "vintage wine" means nothing--it can be a wine of any age.

So what (give me the official dictionary definition), is computer "vintage"? Case in point, is "vintage" any more meaningful than "old" when used int he context of personal computers? Is it better than "antique" or "crufty"?

So, "I have a vintage 1975 Altair 8800", or "a vintage 1983 IBM 5150".
 
+1 for Trixter.

That said, I would consider any computer that is beyond the point of (practical) usefulness, vintage. Where the sole reason of use would be recreational.
 
NeXT said:
As trixter has mentioned, the goalposts are moving as we speak. My problem with that however is we eventually encroach into later generations of computers where between brands they become extremely similar or the technologies they use have changed little in the following years. I have issues telling people with a straight face that a Commodore 64 is as vintage as a dual Pentium Pro machine. It's two entirely different generations of hardware.

It's like how here in BC you can own a 1980 Corvette and have Collector plates on it, but then I pull up next to you in a 1992 Geo Tracker with collector plates as well because the car is technically past the 25 year requirement.
Two MASSIVELY different cars in every possible way, yet both are technically "vintage".
Click to expand...

The only difference there is what people would find collectable, and I have an 81 vette in the garage.

I can see people wanting the 92 tracker because maybe it was their first car and wanted to relive the memories of that. I see people buying off brand machines I wouldn't want because of memories like that. I got my Corvette because I wanted one bad when I was a teenager. Probably should have picked up a Buick Grand National instead .... live and learn.
 
I think Trixster nailed it.

Vintage/classic/retro whatever you want to call it is a moving target as time moves on so does the date. In 20 years, how many i7 will be left? It's not always about how many were produced, but what survived. A 1960's Ford Fairlane is as classic car just as a 1932 Ford coupe, just not as expensive or rare. I bet most of the 1932 Ford coupe guys started in a less vintage vehicle and as they could afford or got deeper into the hobby they moved backwards in time to what they collect.

In 20 years someone may start with an i7 and eventually move to a classic 486 and then to an 8080 IMSAI. Eventually they may even move into a PDP-8 or Vax.

This hobby has a lot of similarities to Classic Car collecting.

Cheers,
Corey
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top