Sure, but in that case it probably wasn't a Celeron, and there's industrial players still keeping 386 systems alive for one reason or another, but it feels in bad faith to call it "brand new" when it's actually "~10 year old, new old stock". Do you know what I mean?
Maybe it's the language barrier since I'm not a native English speaker but where I'm from the phrase "brand new" means something different, it means something that just came onto the market very recently, not something that came on the market 10+ years ago but was never opened from the packaging. That's no longer means "brand new", it means "old but never used/opened". Very different things.
So when you tell me "brand new 32 bit Celeron" it is understood as "just came onto the market".
Am I right or wrong with this understanding?
>My point is this stuff is still in play in a lot of places.
I spent ~15 years in embedded and can't concur on the "still in play in a lot of places" part, but I'm not denying some users can't still exists out there, however I'm sure we can probably count them on very few fingers since Intel's 32 bit Embedded chips never had much traction to begin with.
I've never understood 'brand new' to imply anything about freshness. But according to Mirriam-Webster it means both in different, but very similar, contexts.
The distinction in English might be more in "new" versus "used". And yes, that is inconsistent, you would think "new" versus "old" and "used" versus "unused". But alas :)
As in, a product that was manufactured, kept in its original packaging, and "unopened and unused".
(Although there's some allowances for the vendor to test because you don't want to buy something DOA.)
(Although I won't get too angry for someone saying "brand new." "New old stock" is kind of an obscure term that you don't come across unless you're the kind of person who cares about that kind of thing.)
