|
Pilsner posted:
  
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
Anything containing 100% less radium is good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
They've just hidden the Digg button somewhere. Search every pixel!
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 16:08
|
|
|
If I'm not mistaken, because SCSI typically had high-end controllers with on-board processors, they were also useful back in those days where your main CPU's processor cycles were precious.Parallel Paraplegic posted:Oh gently caress you just reminded me of the age when you had to connect the CD drive to the motherboard with a completely separate tiny cable if you wanted to be able to play CD audio, and of the fact that a lot CD drives had stereo out jacks and little volume knobs on the drives themselves so you could bypass the whole computer thing altogether. I completely forgot that existed until right now. Fun fact: I know someone who played through Loom on CD in full quality but without having a sound card in his machine, simply by plugging speakers into the front audio out port on his CD drive. He also played Monkey Island 1 on CD this way and got the Redbook music, but all the sound effects in the game like sword clashes were pumped out of his PC Speaker. Related: CD-ROM drive speed actually being a system requirement for games. Sierra had a few FMV games that were notoriously choppy even with 2x drives (at the time, a standalone 4x drive with no burn capability was at least $300), notably Phantasmagoria and Gabriel Knight 2. Probably the funniest thing is that modern codecs designed for use on CPUs orders of magnitude faster than the day's 486s and Pentium 1s wouldn't even need higher than 1x drive speeds to produce far better quality video than those games had at the time. This whole thing seems surreal when I bought an external USB DVD-RW burner for $17 (because I need disc capability so rarely I don't even bother with internal drives anymore). univbee has a new favorite as of 16:55 on Jan 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
univbee posted:If I'm not mistaken, because SCSI typically had high-end controllers with on-board processors, they were also useful back in those days where your main CPU's processor cycles were precious. On the first, somewhat. There were a lot of dumb/simple SCSI controllers too, whose owners seemed to assume still made their computers objectively better. Likewise how even when the transfer rates were higher, they were still well ahead of actual drive read/write speeds so it only mattered if you were writing to multiple drives as it was. On the second, it was interesting that way. That mentioned separate cord on the IDE drive was just an analog audio out that filtered through the sound card anyway. Playing CD audio like Redbook, the CD-ROM functioned just as an audio CD player rather than something delivering digital data at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:On the second, it was interesting that way. That mentioned separate cord on the IDE drive was just an analog audio out that filtered through the sound card anyway. Playing CD audio like Redbook, the CD-ROM functioned just as an audio CD player rather than something delivering digital data at all. Early CDROM drives were not even capable of encoding redbook audio as a digital stream over ATA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
Low Desert Punk posted:^ Yeah. I suppose the point is so dust and other things like that don't actually touch the disk (or touch it as little as possible) because the discs look like they could fail if you look at them the wrong way. I don't own a player for them unfortunately, but the picture from what I can gather is pretty awful even on sealed, seemingly perfectly intact carts. A friend of mine purchased a collection this a year and in that were about 100 players. Most of them don't work because the rubber belts have liquefied over time
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
DNova posted:Early CDROM drives were not even capable of encoding redbook audio as a digital stream over ATA. Early ATA interfaces, if I recall, required full attention from the CPU. The port was just an group of simple IO ports with no special logic and the way the protocol worked with the drives the CPU had to do individual reads and writes for each byte transferred, and could not use DMA to do it. The first double-speed ATA CDROMs consumed 75% of the CPU just doing IO reads and writes, which left precious little time to do IO of audio. In MSDOS this didn't matter because there was no multitasking during IO anyway, but it caused problems under Enhanced mode Windows. SCSI ruled because you could fire off a DMA request and wait for it to complete when your disk sector was transferred, and let Windows run another process while you waited (as long as it didn't need to do any IO at all, as Windows treated the whole of DOS as one single-threaded monolith). The SCSI bus protocol was implemented in hardware which permitted DMA but also made SCSI controllers expensive, some of them having another 16-bit processor on the SCSI controller as well as each SCSI drive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
I once had a dedicated SCSI A3 scanner and A1 printer on some ancient IBM tower thing that I had scored from an architectural firm. I think even the CD burner was also fed into the SCSI card. The problem was the SCSI card was ISA so I was unable to rat it and use it in another system so the payoff was a painfully slow system that I was unable to buy anything to upgrade it with. I remember the scanner being a sheer nightmare to install where upon going to their website they only offered the drivers on CD for $20. Yet if you typed in their European address you were able to download it for free off their FTP. Do obsolete 90's computer jokes count? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
WebDog posted:I once had a dedicated SCSI A3 scanner and A1 printer on some ancient IBM tower thing that I had scored from an architectural firm. I think even the CD burner was also fed into the SCSI card. That reminds me. Does anyone else remember old CRT page monitors? The were monitors that were a very tall aspect ratio meant to be able to display a whole page in a word processor at one time. I can't find any information on what the actual aspect ratio of these monitors were, but it seems like there were pretty close to what a common wide screen monitor is today, but turn vertical. I had seem some that had a rotatable base and special video card that would automatically change the picture to match the screens orientation. It seems that this is a technology that the internet has completely forgot... or rather might have never known about since they died out before the internet came in to wide use.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
Lowen SoDium posted:That reminds me. Does anyone else remember old CRT page monitors? The were monitors that were a very tall aspect ratio meant to be able to display a whole page in a word processor at one time. I can't find any information on what the actual aspect ratio of these monitors were, but it seems like there were pretty close to what a common wide screen monitor is today, but turn vertical. I had seem some that had a rotatable base and special video card that would automatically change the picture to match the screens orientation. It seems that this is a technology that the internet has completely forgot... or rather might have never known about since they died out before the internet came in to wide use. A lot of LCD monitors do the rotate trick, it pretty much owns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
Lowen SoDium posted:That reminds me. Does anyone else remember old CRT page monitors? The were monitors that were a very tall aspect ratio meant to be able to display a whole page in a word processor at one time. I can't find any information on what the actual aspect ratio of these monitors were, but it seems like there were pretty close to what a common wide screen monitor is today, but turn vertical. I had seem some that had a rotatable base and special video card that would automatically change the picture to match the screens orientation. It seems that this is a technology that the internet has completely forgot... or rather might have never known about since they died out before the internet came in to wide use.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
Lowen SoDium posted:That reminds me. Does anyone else remember old CRT page monitors? The were monitors that were a very tall aspect ratio meant to be able to display a whole page in a word processor at one time. I can't find any information on what the actual aspect ratio of these monitors were, but it seems like there were pretty close to what a common wide screen monitor is today, but turn vertical. I had seem some that had a rotatable base and special video card that would automatically change the picture to match the screens orientation. It seems that this is a technology that the internet has completely forgot... or rather might have never known about since they died out before the internet came in to wide use. As mentioned, most current LCD monitors allow for this if you mount them on the right type of mount, and there was even a set of shortcut keys going back to I think Windows XP that would re-orient your screen, like Ctrl-Shift-one of the arrows to determine directionality. As for CRTs doing this, all I know of is certain old arcade cabinets had these for vertically-oriented games, especially vertical shooters like 1942. When MAME was starting, these games defaulted to assuming you had a standard 4x3 monitor and rendered accordingly, but you could throw in some commandline switches to force the game to render sideways and use more of the screen real-estate. Some people did this to turn their monitors sideways, but MAME was filled with warnings about this since CRT monitors back then (LCD still wasn't really a thing) weren't designed to function sideways; their internal functions could get screwed up by gravity not going the way they were expecting, plus a CRT isn't very safe to have setup in a way it's not supposed to be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:A lot of LCD monitors do the rotate trick, it pretty much owns. Yep, for a while I had two Dell 24" displays set up with one in portrait for web browsing. Also nice for viewing high res comic book pages one at a time. Nvidia control panel can rotate either monitor 90, 180, or 270 degrees from "normal" for any orientation. Not sure about AMD hardware.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
univbee posted:As mentioned, most current LCD monitors allow for this if you mount them on the right type of mount, and there was even a set of shortcut keys going back to I think Windows XP that would re-orient your screen, like Ctrl-Shift-one of the arrows to determine directionality. I wonder what they thought the original arcade cabinets used, if not CRTs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
Lowen SoDium posted:That reminds me. Does anyone else remember old CRT page monitors? The were monitors that were a very tall aspect ratio meant to be able to display a whole page in a word processor at one time. I can't find any information on what the actual aspect ratio of these monitors were, but it seems like there were pretty close to what a common wide screen monitor is today, but turn vertical. I had seem some that had a rotatable base and special video card that would automatically change the picture to match the screens orientation. It seems that this is a technology that the internet has completely forgot... or rather might have never known about since they died out before the internet came in to wide use. You're not the only one who remembers these. Around 1994, I had a girlfriend who worked at Glamour Shots and they were using monitors like this to show full body portraits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
Jedit posted:I wonder what they thought the original arcade cabinets used, if not CRTs? Definitely CRTs, sometimes vector based instead of raster scan. Mostly airflow issues and possibly the issues with the earths magnetic field rotating the image would be the reason why not to mount CRTs sideways. Another issue is the mechanical mounting of the CRT to the chassis might not work well sideways. Fun fact: CRT tubes are designed for use on only one hemisphere, moving one from the south of the equator to the north can cause the image on screen to rotate and you may have issues with colour purity that a normal degauss won't solve. A fun anecdote I heard: Bang & Olufsen would sometimes mount CRTs upside down for use on the "wrong" hemisphere, that made it easier to get the colour purity right later during production. With large screen TVs the compass direction they're facing can cause a degree or two of rotation, high end TVs had a rotate function built in. longview has a new favorite as of 21:27 on Jan 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
The only name I remember for portrait monitors is Radius. They were nice for page layout, but when widescreen arrived seeing two pages side by side (albeit smaller) outweighed it. I have a Hanns G monitor from around 2007 that can do the portrait rotation trick but I've never used it that way. EDIT: Oh, Internet. Is there anything you don't know? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvqxvODBydo EDIT2: Holy poo poo, Shufflepuck Cafe!
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
When I had my tattoo done last year, I saw one of the artists rotate his monitor for portrait images and such. It's a pretty common thing when you're doing stuff that needs viewing like that. I know my monitor's mount can swivel it 180 degrees. Never had a use for it though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
Jedit posted:I wonder what they thought the original arcade cabinets used, if not CRTs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
WebDog posted:I remember the scanner being a sheer nightmare to install where upon going to their website they only offered the drivers on CD for $20. Yet if you typed in their European address you were able to download it for free off their FTP. Standalone scanners are still total nightmares to install. MFPs seem to be able to scan without issue once you install them, but there is no loving end to issues with standalone setups. It's 20-loving-13, there's no excuse for how bad the state of scanners still is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
Inspector_71 posted:Standalone scanners are still total nightmares to install. MFPs seem to be able to scan without issue once you install them, but there is no loving end to issues with standalone setups. It's 20-loving-13, there's no excuse for how bad the state of scanners still is. Mine from a couple years ago is supposed to be able to scan from it's on printer screen to the computer, and even let you choose what program to open it with. That worked for about 2 months. Then it wouldn't even let you scan to a computer from that menu. At least it still works if you open the scanning software on the computer to start it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
I recall playing Prince of Persia at school on one of the old Macs and upon drinking the potion that inverted the screen, our solution was to turn the monitor upside down which resulted in the image melting into a sickly purple tone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
Lowen SoDium posted:That reminds me. Does anyone else remember old CRT page monitors? The were monitors that were a very tall aspect ratio meant to be able to display a whole page in a word processor at one time. I can't find any information on what the actual aspect ratio of these monitors were, but it seems like there were pretty close to what a common wide screen monitor is today, but turn vertical. I had seem some that had a rotatable base and special video card that would automatically change the picture to match the screens orientation. It seems that this is a technology that the internet has completely forgot... or rather might have never known about since they died out before the internet came in to wide use. The old Mac SE had a vertical monitor you could hook up as an external and if I recall correctly we had some Quadras at the college newspaper hooked to vertical CRT's. Obviously these had very limited uses outside of publishing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 03:20
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:The only name I remember for portrait monitors is Radius. They were nice for page layout, but when widescreen arrived seeing two pages side by side (albeit smaller) outweighed it. Isn't taking one of these and doubling the relative width the origin of those terrible 5:4 LCDs that used to be everywhere?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
I must admit that my mind was completely blown when, in about 1993, the local computer guy came over to our house to install a CD-ROM drive upgrade (2x, with a caddy), put in a CD of Bach music, and played a CD with the computer. Even stuff like the transport controls amazed me -- it's just like the front panel of a CD player, but virtual! It was a Mac IIvi, for the record. Introduced on my sixth birthday, and the computer that got me started in digital graphics. That was a good computer. Sagebrush has a new favorite as of 05:40 on Jan 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:I've never seen one in real life, only the Xerox Alto in pictures. I guess there's a reason it didn't stick. First 10 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24FT3u-lhg4 Actually the whole video is kind of a museum of obsolete technology. And boobies. (Film geek bonus: Directed by David Fincher)
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 06:41
|
|
|
Outside of Karaoke, does anyone still put CD+G on Audio CD'? I remember when it first came out how hot that was. Also VRML.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 07:11
|
|
|
I was always a pretty early adopter of pdas and cell phones, especially when I was in college in the 90s. I was one of the first people on my campus to have a mobile phone, an actual car phone, in a bag with a headset and antenna that went on my car. But along with that, I had my other gadgets. I fell in love with little electronic gadgets as a kid: One of the first I ever got, back when I was 7 or 8 was the GCE Sports Game Watch.  The graphics were lovely. Of the 3 games (football, basketball, soccer) I could only figure out how to play basketball, and I couldn't care less about sports and really had wanted one of the other ones they made like the one that played space games. But who the gently caress cared? It was a video game on my wrist. At a time when video games were giant cabinets at the mall! It had a joystick! Holy poo poo!!! Later, when I was getting all into Transformers, and that other watch had sadly died, I got this badass mofo:  JESUS loving CHRIST Look at this! It's a watch that turns into a loving ROBOT.  I can play with this at my desk in boring school! I can bring a toy to class disguised as my watch! My teachers will NEVER KNOW! Watch mode:  Party mode:  I vainly looked for the even more rad scorpion one to do battle at my desk, but I could never find it.  When I became "older" and "more mature" (6th grade) I got this sweet classic calculator watch:  Oh. Did I say "calculator watch?" I meant "Data Bank.:  This puppy had a KEYBOARD, calendar, scheduler, stopwatch, and could hold phone numbers of ALL MY MANY FRIENDS.  It is still sold to this day by Casio. To Hipsters.   Around the same time I found this badass pocket tv on clearance for like $20 at Caldor:  Backlit by the power of THE SUN (ie you had to shine a light at the back and watch it through a mirror) you could glimpse a very pixillated black and white tv image, but godammit, TV in my pocket! Some rear end in a top hat kid I went to school with swiped it from me when I slept over at his house right before I moved. If you're reading this, gently caress you.  Later though, I got a cool color Pocket TV:  The concept, I'll admit, was cooler than the reality. It was color, but it lacked the panache of the little flip black and white model. Plus, I lived in the suburbs and couldn't get much in the way of stations, and if I took it on trips in the car reception was even worse. Still have it though, and it still works. When I first went to college in the early 90s I got this sweet little Casio Organizer. Better than my old watch, this could store phone numbers! Or notes! On a 2x12 display!  It had "SECRET FUNCTIONS"  Which pretty much meant you could put some screens of data under a password. I used it to remember numbers, unlike all my loser friends who had to "write numbers down on a piece of paper and carry it around!" LOSERS! And I'd put notes on it. Paperless world. In the mid 90s I got a Psion Siena, a little black and white organizer that could show primitive graphics, had a calculator, world time zone clock, ability to run programs, and pretty amazingly, spreadsheets and a word processor. Compared to that Casio, it was amazing. I felt like James Bond, whipping this little pocket computer out when few on my campus even had laptops. It was about checkbook sized (remember those?) and a forest green colored case. Very swank.  Sadly, not too long after I got it the screen failed. I think it was because I left it in the bathroom while showering, and the steam/condensation in the air did something, because half screen was blank striped out. To this day it's probably the gadget I miss the most. I never had enough time with it, and it was small and uncommon in a time when nobody had stuff like that. Now everyone has a smartphone. I wouldn't be able to afford another PDA until after college, when I was working my first salaried job, and I got an HP Jornada:  Color, fit in my back pocket, and I could download websites by syncing up in the morning before I went to work and therefore read the news while all my Luddite coworkers read "newspapers" on morning break. Also I could put books on there that I downloaded from Gutenburg. It had a sweet clamshell top and stylus, and I got that cool foldable keyboard. Went I went on the road for work, I even got a 33/6 modem and could surf the internet on it! I posted on these very forums, from work or my hotel, on that baby, during the year of  Never forget.  I dropped a few of these and they were fragile as hell so it was a case where buying a warranty worked out. I was going to get a 560 when they merged with Compaq and put a bullet in their own HP line. So I flpped to Ipaqs and had a few of those sleek silver guys.  I liked them because they were much smaller than the Jornadas, but I missed the clamshell til I found a nice silver hardcase that opened like a book.  I had a 1945 as well, but it looked the same. They were great because unlike the Jornada with it's bulky Compact Flash cards, they took the MUCH smaller SD cards (still 5x the size of an Mini or Micro, but hey, it was almost 10 years ago). Now I could have tons of music with me as well, even tv episodes. I could also play video games by running NES and SNES emulators! Another fun gadget I got around 2001 when I travelled a lot was a portable DVD player, back when they were like $500.  Like this, but with a smaller screen. But it WAS useful for plugging into a tv, and with a middlin' set of computer surround sound speakers, I had a portable home theater for my hotel.  It still works today, though I don't have much use for it.After many years of all these things, and various smaller and smaller Nokia and Motorola cell phones, I finally felt smartphones had come enough of a way for me to merge the two gadgets a few years ago. I got a Motorola Q.  Smaller than an Ipaq, with much more memory and processing and it used smaller cards. It was an all in one device that had the ability to surf the web, hold tons of music, stream video, and make calls. I no longer had to carry 2 devices. I missed the much larger screen of my Ipaq, as well as the touchscreen/stylus, but I really wanted a "real" keyboard. It also ran Windows Mobile, which I'd used as an OS since it was Pocket PC on my Jornada, so I was attached. I had the Q for years, far past my eligibility for upgrade, but I liked it. Finally though, I moved up to an HTC Ozone, which was the next closest thing to a Q with Windows Mobile and a full keyboard:  Ironically, when I had this I started working at a company that forbade even salaried managers from carrying a cell phone while at work. I couldn't live without a pocket computer, so I dug out the old Ipaq, the last 1945 I used, got it up and running again and for a few glorious months dutifully left my phone in my car and carried my old PDA. I remembered how much I loved the larger touch screen and loved jotting on it with the stylus. Sadly, a few months later it got some sort of horrible fault which basically bricked it. When I got into a car accident around then and the Ozone screen cracked (that was a first in a while, I hadn't had an issue with a broken screen since my Jornada days--cell phones are so much more durable than PDAs) I temporarily went back to the old Q, and as soon as my next upgrade moved on from Pocket PC/Windows Mobile and got a Motorola Droid Global. I went through one already due to a drop which took out the cell radio and was told it was irreparable and out of warranty, so I bought a used one. I like it because it has a huge touch screen but a flip out full keyboard. I can surf the full internet, play games with great graphics, use tiny micro SD cards to hold hundreds of songs and even movies. It's quite amazing, all the devices I've owned. When I think of the power I have in my pocket and what I imagined I could have back in the 80s as a kid, I never came close to what I have and can do now. And with the way things will change, who knows what we'll have in 10 years. Probably business card sized phones with virtual laser keyboards and popup holgraphic displays or even retinal contact style interfaces. Maybe we'll go back to watch computers. Still wish my phone could turn to a scorpion though. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
Sir, while you have a very interesting gadget history, your pocket tv does not in fact still work. I know this because I have one from around the late 90s-early 2000's (I don't know exactly) that let little me watch tv shows when I should have been sleeping and while it still turns on the digital signal switch made it a device that quickly and efficiently drains 5 AA batteries while displaying static.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 07:27
|
|
|
Ninja Toast! posted:Sir, while you have a very interesting gadget history, your pocket tv does not in fact still work. I know this because I have one from around the late 90s-early 2000's (I don't know exactly) that let little me watch tv shows when I should have been sleeping and while it still turns on the digital signal switch made it a device that quickly and efficiently drains 5 AA batteries while displaying static. Yeah, this is true. drat death of analog tv.  Though if I could find an old Nintendo that had a VHF adaptor I could hold the contacts up to the antenna of the tv and play sweet, tiny Nintendo. Or I could use my phone and an emulator. Modern tech just isn't as fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 07:40
|
|
|
Astroman posted:Yeah, this is true. drat death of analog tv. I think mine might have some random proprietary input on it you can use, but really that would be ridiculous for any situation I can possibly imagine. Plus I have netflix on my phone so screw it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 08:41
|
|
|
The SNES one is a composite video and audio and I'm not sure how to wire something up for it, but don't forget most VCRs already have RF modulators in them. They haven't turned out analogue here yet  but when they do, I'll be ready.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 08:57
|
|
|
Astroman posted:Around the same time I found this badass pocket tv on clearance for like $20 at Caldor: You just brought back a flood of memories of watching tiny black and white fuzzy Stargate SG-1 phase in and out of reception on long car trips with my dad 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 09:46
|
|
|
In the 80s my Mum bought a cassette radio tv because my Dad hated her soaps so she would go watch them in the kitchen or bedroom on this little thing: Other than being rebranded it was identical to this picture, I'm pretty sure for the price she could of bought a normal small colour TV and small portable stereo as well so it seemed pretty dumb even when it was brand new.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 12:48
|
|
|
Astroman posted:
Welp, off to eBay I go. I was trying to save money, too, you jerk. Fake edit: Hey, only $106 for your precious scorpion watch! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 15:39
|
|
|
Astroman posted:Around the same time I found this badass pocket tv on clearance for like $20 at Caldor: I have one of these, along with the detachable electroluminescent backlight accessory.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
Lord Dekks posted:In the 80s my Mum bought a cassette radio tv because my Dad hated her soaps so she would go watch them in the kitchen or bedroom on this little thing: We had something similar in the 80s, but without the radio or tape player. It had a 5" black & white screen and was "portable" in the sense that you could stuff 6 or 8 D batteries in it and run off of those, at least for 30 minutes or so. It served as a kitchen TV until the end of 2004 when when it was replaced by an LCD. I ended up throwing it away a few years ago because I couldn't even give it away for free due to the impending doom of analog TV. That tough little thing still worked after 20+ years though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
It seems that the digital conversion really wiped the market of portable tvs out. Well that, and smartphones. Casio doesn't even make them anymore. It seems there may be a few but it's hard to tell which ones are digital and which are analog. Not surprisingly, a lot of people selling them online leave that little fact out. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 06:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Welp, off to eBay I go. Holy poo poo....I forgot all about these. I had the scorpion one and one other that I can't remember.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 13:41
|
|