https://twitter.com/NanoRaptor/status/1482620740021395458

*Eleven* diskette controller-based drives, and no sign of RAID arrays. Didn't even make it look or resemble a model number like '195' or '295' that actually existed. I would say it is posted as a joke, but who knows.

Look at the front base for repeated image pieces...

On 17-01-2022 08:32, IBMMuseum wrote:
> https://twitter.com/NanoRaptor/status/1482620740021395458
>
> *Eleven* diskette controller-based drives, and no sign of RAID arrays. Didn't even make it look or resemble a model number like '195' or '295' that actually existed. I would say it is posted as a joke, but who knows.
>
> Look at the front base for repeated image pieces...
>

Well, somebody went through a *lot* of trouble to make this!

Label says 9585-0XF. Should have been something like 9255-XXL ;)

The light line at the top (between the front and the body) is a give-away: two breaks where the original body of a 9585 would end....

The upper-middle led-panel is a beauty: lights for nuclear, Apple, engine, seatbelt, ?, ?, Twitter

As I said, someone with a lot of spare time.... but nice!

--
Jelte,
Admirer of the letter of IBM with blue Ishiki

On 17.01.2022 10:34, JWR wrote:
> The upper-middle led-panel is a beauty: lights for nuclear, Apple,
> engine, seatbelt, ?, ?, Twitter

Haha, that had me rolling.

Must be a real pain to maintain with only one access panel... :P

Hard enough opening ONE front bezel, imagine the mounting points for a
triple-wide front bezel.

Proportions look correct. Only thing NOT plausible is the floppy in
place of the op panel.

https://ardent-tool.com/floppy/5_25_Floppy_Adapter.html The later 1.2MB
model.

Three 3.5" or 2+tape... possumble.

On 1/17/2022 05:05, Tomas Slavotinek wrote:
> only one access panel... :P

To be klar, three floppy devices on the planar FDC.

The 5.25 on a 1.2MB floppy /A

On 1/17/2022 08:23, Louis Ohland wrote:
> Three 3.5" or 2+tape... possumble.

On 17.01.2022 15:23, Louis Ohland wrote:
> Only thing NOT plausible is the floppy in place of the op panel.

True dat...

On 1/17/22 12:32 AM, IBMMuseum wrote:
> twitter(.)com/NanoRaptor/

> I would say it is posted as a joke, but who knows.

NanoRaptor is well known for PhotoShoped images of things that don't
actually exist.

They are becoming so prevalent that they are starting to pollute image
searches as they spread.

I've permanently blocked NanoRaptor on my Twitter clients because I
think the joke has gone too far.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

> NanoRaptor is well known for PhotoShoped
> images of things that don't actually exist.

At least the buildings are a more obvious parody - The 'L'-screen Apple showed up on a Facebook group as fact and also wasn't received well. Yes, she commonly does it and caught me too.

On 1/17/22 9:42 AM, IBMMuseum wrote:
> At least the buildings are a more obvious parody - The 'L'-screen
> Apple showed up on a Facebook group as fact and also wasn't received
> well. Yes, she commonly does it and caught me too.

ACK

I find some of the things to be quite ... humorous.

I just wish that there was some sort of obvious indication that they
were fakes. Something like a trade brand / logo / etc.

I remember some of the earlier ones that were more believable and made
me question things before I realized the pattern of the source.

I fear that in 1 - 3 - 5 - 10 years time there is going to be so much of
this that it's going to make legitimate retro-computing archeology ...
problematic.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

What is also annoying is Internet Archive's wonky "this link exists on
the internet" -AND- you cannot see the actual page before you save it.

Another annoyance is the pages with automatically generated text. The
text contains your search terms, and gets hits on search engines, but
the actual page is just a wall of text.

On 1/17/2022 11:35, Grant Taylor wrote:
> I fear that in 1 - 3 - 5 - 10 years time there is going to be so much of
> this that it's going to make legitimate retro-computing archeology ...
> problematic.