Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- From: bof <nothingread@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:41:06 +0000
In message <MPG.1e5966bfb6f44eef98a355@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sam Nelson <sam@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes
In article <43ef4e7b$0$23284$db0fefd9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
Mary Pegg <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> How much did that cost?
I've no real idea. When you're five, you can't really grasp large amounts of
money.
But calculators of that era were a number of tens of pounds.
My first calculator was a Commodore SR7949B, a bit like
http://www.vintagecalculators.com/comm7919.jpg
which I'm fairly sure was GBP30 in mid-1976. That was an enormous
amount of money, I distinctly remember thinking.
I remember paying £20 for a Sinclair Cambridge (probably 1974) which at £2.50/day was eight weeks Saturday job money, but worth every penny.
--
bof at bof dot me dot uk
.
- References:
- Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- From: Sam Nelson
- Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- From: Peter Corlett
- Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- From: Mary Pegg
- Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- From: Peter Corlett
- Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- From: Sam Nelson
- Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- Prev by Date: Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- Next by Date: Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- Previous by thread: Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- Next by thread: Re: [geek] was [Moderate geek. . .]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
