On Sep 17, 9:50 am, "dott.Piergiorgio"
<dott.PiergiorgioNI...@KAIGUN.fastwebnet.it> wrote:
agree on all points, but save the chip markings: I think that looking
the die size under the hood of an (allegedly) genuine and *working*
machine means also destroying the chip, and replacing it reduces the
value of the machine, if really genuine....
That's one of the reasons I mentioned EPROMs - they don't require
opening.
Deleting the prod number and writing an earlier, fake prod number (and
same treatment to the other anachronistic markings on the chip) is
relatively easy, I fear...
It's relatively easy, if you have the equipment. But it is hard to
reproduce the original texture on the device (fakers often get it
wrong), and it is often quite noticeable when the top and bottom of
the device do not match in texture. Come to think of it, I would not
be surprised if it is possible to check the composition of the resin.
I would suspect the formulas vary from decade to decade, and the
effects of aging might be detectable also.
Frankly I think anyone except a professional museum owner who would
spend $10k or more on a "rare" prototype on eBay is out of his mind.
And if I was such a person, I would have an inspection X-ray machine -
they don't cost terribly much (relatively speaking - you could pick
one up for $20k, or borrow access to one for much less).