Re: [photo-3d] Not buying a printer

[Mike Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ron Beck wrote:
> 
> Mike Kersenbrock wrote:
> >
> > P.S. - One does NOT have to replace a unit when it becomes obsolete
> >        (everybody throw away their 50's stereo cameras yet?), only when
> >        it's not longer useful.  My computer is still a grossly obsolete
> >        slow-as-a-frozen-slug AMD K6-3 400-Mhz system, but it's still
> >        useful.  My dyesub printer is getting "old" as well, but it's doing
> >        fine as well - I haven't been lusting after any new one (yet).
> 
> Oh, pluueeeezze.  I find it hard to pity anyone with an AMD K6-3 400Mhz
> system when I sit at home on a P5/90 while holding my breath on the eBay
> motherboard I bid on which will allow me to upgrade to a Celeron 300Mhz!

That's rather my point (along with my comment about Realist-like stereo 
cameras, despite my tongue-in-cheek quickie response to George's posting).

My point was that you DONT replace it just because something's new, you
replace it when it isn't useful FOR YOU.  That's why people DO USE
their realists, and why people DO use P5/90's (or K6-3 400's) even
though there are better/newer products available.  If it's useful,
continue to use it until it no longer meets one's requirements!

This was in response to a comment that one can't buy a printer new
because it'll be obsoleted quickly.  I say no way!  Buy it and use
it and enjoy it, and continue that way until needs aren't met, not
just until Mr Jones next door has something better!  


Mike K.

P.S. - The marketprice ratio of a new computer vs an IBM PC XT era
       computer is GREATER than that of an RBT camera vs a 50's
       Realist. IOW, an arguement that RBT's aren't realist replacements
       because of their price doesn't work in terms of these comparisons
       because the new computer is even MORE expensive compared to
       the used price of the older technology.  :-)