We all know which models have better longevity, and concerns about hardware failure are minimal to me. I'm only distributing 3/4 of the inventory at any given time to allow for easy swaps when such situations do arise.
Why does a 10 year old computer need to be something for hobbyists and collectors only? With service issues aside, why is a computer from 1997 (in use purely for educational/personal productivity tasks, running contemporary applications) any less useful in that role that it was a decade ago? They are indeed "too slow, have low ram, and have an obsolete OS" for anything produced after their time or release, but those applications were excellent. I might even argue that these older machines are better suited for the task given the simplicity of the interface (AtEase or otherwise) and the clarity of the software. Frankly, I'm glad that the younger recipients aren't able to hop on the internet without supervision.
I understand the rationale for how surplus school computer equipment is treated. It's based on the need for responsible handling of public assets; but what I'm saying is there are shortcomings in this process that mean more to the community.