4 ms·
The article is misleading, sort of, probably not intentionally. But if you look at the screenshots of the files, they are actually _1.0 and _2.0, but also there
by codezero 11y ago
The article is misleading, sort of, probably not intentionally. But if you look at the screenshots of the files, they are actually _1.0 and _2.0, but also there's a _0.16 – which is the earliest one he got running. That's available in links up the thread – still a very cool thing to find in the wild.
- pupeno 11y agoI'm the author of the original article and it's not my intention to be misleading. This happened to me a few years ago and the few pictures I got are actually quite blurry. My friends, though geeks, were sort of feed up with me and that machine and wanting to document it. I distinctly remember the version numbers I played with starting with a 0 and I remember 0.1 or 0_1 and 0.2 or 0_2 and that the first one I tried, the earliest, didn't work. Oh, how I wish I had that computer.