• wagoner@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    26 days ago

    Realistically, what can you use this for that’s worthwhile?

    Cool looking device though.

    • veee@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      26 days ago

      You could relive booting up your computer at breakfast to get it ready to use by lunchtime.

      • 555@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        26 days ago

        If it doesn’t have that hard drive crunch to remind me it hasn’t locked up than I’m not interested.

        • Fillicia@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          26 days ago

          See for me it’s the “you can now shut down your pc” message so I know I can shut down the uselessly huge toggle on the front of my tower.

          • 555@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            26 days ago

            I always liked knowing I could kill it with a press. None of this “asking” to shutdown.

    • Toes♀@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      26 days ago

      You could play Wolfenstein?

      But realistically, I could see this being helpful if you maintain a lot of legacy gear and need to drag around something reliable to test with.

      • 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚐@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        40MHz is plenty for doom.

        Ew, no. Even 386DX-40 is terrible for Doom:

        Doom timedemo 386 DX 40 MHz DOS PC

        486SX-33 is certainly playable, but you really want 486DX2/66:

        Doom Timedemo - 486DX2/66MHz

        Edit: grammar

        Edit 2: These videos are accurate, btw. I upgraded from 386SX-25 to 486SX-33 just for Doom while my friend got the 486DX2/66 Packard Bell. Envy.

        Edit 3: My memory forced me to go back and properly designate the models.

        • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          24 days ago

          Can confirm. My dad had a 386DX-40 when I got my hands on a copy of Doom, and it was a fucking slideshow at best.

        • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          25 days ago

          I had a 386sx@25MHz too and I don’t remember it being that slow. Unless that demo has the detail cranked up to high or something like that. Although, like that first commenter I had a math co-processor, so maybe that helped.

          Or maybe my memory is off and I made the window tiny.

          • 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚐@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            25 days ago

            Are you sure you didn’t set low-detail with the viewport cranked way down? I played it on the same model with a math co-processor and it could not handle high-detail and the large viewport in the video.

            Edit: I’m fairly certain I had a math co-processor, but I’ll defer to you on this detail just in case. That would certainly make a sizeable difference.

            • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              25 days ago

              I think the detail level made a pretty big difference. I definitely ran it in low and kind of forgot that high was an option, but the shotgun animation in that video is bringing up some traumatic memories.

    • DannyMac@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      If you have to ask, it’s not for you. It’s for retro PC enthusiasts

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        I can see people wanting to use retro software, but what surprises me is this being preferable to modern hardware running old software in emulation.

        Especially a laptop, because I doubt that power management is that amazing on DOS.

        Maybe there is something out there for which this addresses compatibility problems, but…

  • LucidNightmare@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    25 days ago

    For anyone who loves retro PC stuff, I highly recommend LGR on YouTube. His videos are a treat to have in the background, and sometimes to even fall asleep to.

    Mmm. Chunky computers and bits.

  • Gennadios@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    24 days ago

    This is pretty late, they’ve been out for months. The most recent addition is the Pocket 8086, waiting on mine to get delivered.

    It probably doesnt matter to most of you but it has an 8 bit ISA add-on board, meaning its an easy way to test era appropriate components such as Audio and video cards. Great for people more interested in vintage hardware than software.

      • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        26 days ago

        If the point of this thing is to bring back the best of mid-90’s PCs in a compact package, they should have picked the top consumer CPU of the era.

        • 555@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          26 days ago

          They should have used a raspberry pi and some emulators in that adorable little case.

          • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            26 days ago

            Gonna disagree with you there. If the mission is to run 1990s apps, we need a 32bit x86 CPU.

            • 555@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              26 days ago

              I have windows 3.1 running in an emulator faster than that eras hardware could ever dream. So, gonna have to double disagree.

              • tal@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                25 days ago

                Faster isn’t always better – there’s software from the era that relied on hardware limitations to throttle itself – but I’d think that emulators probably have pretty good support for such throttling.

              • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                25 days ago

                If someone wanted emulation, wouldn’t they have bought one of the many other tiny laptops that have been on the market for years?

                I think the point of this is to run natively on vintage hardware.

  • devilish666@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    25 days ago

    It’s cool laptop that inspired today’s small laptop. Nowadays you can buy something like that with powerful spec & smaller form

    • DannyMac@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      25 days ago

      Yes, obviously. You know, I wonder how many instances of Windows 95 you can simultaneously emulate on an Android smartphone? The point is this is for retro PC enthusiasts/hobbyists. For many, emulation just isn’t the same experience as running it on real hardware.