Excepts from <http://sclwww.scl.cwru.edu/~mxs46/retro1.txt>:

| People who engage in professional retrocomputing are much more radical.
| I am an excellent example.

Indeed.  What did you say your profession was, again?

| I personally use MS Word (not WinWord) version 6.00. I run it under
| MS-DOS, dunno if it works under MS OS/2. This is what I'm typing this text
| in. The machine is an Intel 80386-based IBM PC AT-compatible, carefully
| configured to be as close as possible to the real 80286-based IBM PC AT.

Ouch!

May I ask why you don't use the True Vax Solution to word processing,
vi and troff?  Or hell, to type plain text in, why do you need a word
processor at all?  Surely, if you are wanting to pass yourself off as
a Vax Professional, knowledgeable enough about the internals of 4.3BSD
to negatively compare NetBSD to it (I've heard others make the same
comparison and come up with the opposite conclusion; myself, I don't know
enough to judge, I just like for my machines to work), you *must* be
comfortable with vi (and ed/ex :) )?

I don't think of Intel-anything as being "retro", at least for
( anything > 8080A ).  I guess a 4004 would qualify as "fully retro".

Is it considered impolite to ask a person's age on Usenet?

--ben