ThinkpadIL wrote on 2023-10-04, 22:16:
Well, today if you're a hobbyist, you can manage to utilize for this purpose even a vacuum cleaner. 😄
Well, yes and no. It depends. Purely technically, it's correct, likely.
Back in the 90s/2000s, I still thought that technology and appliances would steadily evolve.
But then I realized that it's merely miniaturization of microelectronics.
Other genres weren't affected so much. New energy sources, neither.
All other aspects decreased over that time, rather.
Built-quality, most importantly.
Old appliances were built like tanks, with lots of safety measures.
Now everything is more and more flimsy.
Microwave oven, the fridgerator, thr coffee machine, the mixer. All made of thin plastic/aluminium .
LED bulbs quickly break, because their "power supply" does not handle power surges (just a diode, no caps).
Our German (West-German) Krupp mixer is from the 1970(s) and still works fine, by comparison.
The plastic is robust (not yellowed), the gears are made of metal, the electric motor is in a steel chassis..
And the list goes on. My father's Siemens B/W TV is from the 1970s,too, and still works fine. The picture isn't wobbling or something.
With an internal ~50 years old power supply and no re-cap.
Same goes for our radios.
That old Stabo XF base station (CB) from the early 80s is still fine, no re-cap, either.
Or that Yaesu FT-101 shortwave transceiver..
It's made of full metal, has a very sensitive receiver and a modular design (individual transceiver circuits are on ISA-like cards).
By comparison, all modern radio tech is just.. small and black.
As if Darth Vader himself had built it.. 😂
On top of it, it's just cheaply made. Low quality plastics, tiny soldered SMD components, coils with a poor Q factor.
But sold for the 1000s.
Personally, I've decided to just drop out of this cheap consumerism.
I love the hobby, but I keep tinkering with 1970s/80s tech here.
I'd rather restore a vintage radio and make it more modern (tapping intermediate frequency, IF, so an SDR+computer can display the spectrum and decode things).
Anyway, DIY had always been a part of that hobby, so that's a non-issue (thinking positive).
Edit: To be fair, it's not all black and white.
Quality equipment is still being made, just not for the masses, the "consumers" (= business term for non-people, exploitable creatues).
If we're looking at the professional market or the military, we can still see quality products.
In terms of quality, they do equal products previously sold to private customers years ago.
IMHO It's just that mass production is nolonger good. It's not possible anymore. Too many people for too few resources.
Also, customers/consumers apparently don't care and complain about it. So industry adapts accordingly.
(Edit: It's not just electronics. It's also plastic bottles, beds, furniture, clothes..
Manufacturing quality has degraded for years, but it really sped up in 21th century.
Just think of wooden furniture. It used to be real wood, then plywood, now it's pressboard (garbage+glue). And maybe it's cardboard in the next years, who knows.
The problem is also that this makes repairing at home very difficult.
Back in the day, a wooden board and a nail could be used to fix a real wooden furniture or a broken window.
Likewise, a defective computer board could be repaired. Even that of an C64. On a kitchen table with simple tools.
And that's something that's depressing, I think. It takes a way a bit of independence.)
When was the last time a mechanical keyboard was sold in a PC store? In 1994?
Nowadays keyboards, PCs and peripherals sold in stores are generally of lowest build quality.
The few PC users or hi-fi fans left who need quality have to seek out for small niche companies who still make quality products.
Of course, they ask for a matching compensation. But as a reward, their products will last, at least.
ThinkpadIL wrote on 2023-10-04, 22:16:
By the way, when taking a look at all those late 70's and early 90's computers I have a strong feeling that only IBM knew how to develop a real computer over the years, and all the rest were just bunch of hobbyist who were constantly experimenting and then businessmen like Jack Tramiel tried all their best to sell the results of their experiments to the masses without giving a damn of what will they do with them after buying.
That mister was very unique, I suppose.
If I understood correctly he worked at Commodore and got the C64 on market, then he went to Atari, getting the Atari ST on market.
But before he left Commodore, he insulted/alienated all the business partners to make sure Commodore would be hated and collapse?
That's a really charming character trait, considering that man's backstory.. 😇
PCs.. I think there were quite a few good ones.
The graphical workstations by SGI and Sun, for example.
Or the Acorn Archimedes, an Amiga competitor from the UK, which was barely being advertised by Acorn on European mainland.
Or PC-98 series in Japan. Sharp X68000, too.
Technically, there were a few more for sure, but they don't come to mind right now.
Like the countless MS-DOS compatibles from the early 1980s.
They ran MS-DOS, but didn't copy IBM. Some like the Sirius 1/Victor 9000 were superior, even.
What IBM helped was the fact that it had an excellent reputation as a typewriter company, maybe.
Offices had been its customers from before microccomputers had existed.
kant explain wrote on 2023-10-04, 23:22:
Jo22 wrote on 2023-10-04, 19:27:
Oh, and I also used the Commodore 1702 monitor with the Sharp back then.
Both were working exceptionally well together.
The 1702 was a beautiful monitor, and worked exceptionally well as a (live) video monitor. The one I have presently has a lot of burn:(. I want to stick something else in it's casement. And 3d print a door.
I agree, it was a descent composite video monitor. 😃👍
I assume it had analogue comb filters, too, but I haven't double checked.
The image quality was good enough that it was used in broadcast industry occasionally , as a control monitor in the TV studio.
As a semi-professional equipment.
It also had Chroma/Luma ports on the back, but..
Well, at least my 1702 wasn't that great on doing S-Video (maybe also because of different voltages due to Chroma/Luma inputs) .
S-Video input was very grainy, almost noisy. Composite was descent, though.
Still, I'm kind of confused why these monitors are so glorified/hyped nowadays.
I mean, I still highly value the 1702, but other monitors aren't necessarily worse at doing composite.
What I miss are the control knobs on the front, rather than image quality.
That way, I could correct the image height of my PAL NES/SNES (remove so called PAL border).
And it's not that a 1084 is necessarily worse as a companion for a C64.
Yes, the 170x was the original model. But the C64 does barely take full advantage of its qualities, anyway.
Attaching a VHS player to the Commodore 170x isn't a bad choice, either.
I did this in the 90s and watched a lot of classics on it.
The comb filter did a good work at providing a smooth picture. 🙂
Edit: I really had a VHS "player" here, btw.
It was no VCR because it lacked recording and an RF tuner. It really was a humble player (top loader), about the size of a Super NES (a big taller and wider).
