Technologies that Have Exceeded Their Expectations?

drfunch asks: "With the recent 'passing' of Pioneer 10 after over 30 years of service, I wonder what other technologies have far exceeded expectations. One example from my own experience is my trusty HP calculator, which is still going strong after 21 years. What technologies or devices have gone far beyond your expectations?"

Comments

Not Just HP!

[davecl]

I have a Casio calculator (FX501p) still running happily after more than 22 years!

Palm OS Devices

[IgD]

I'd have to put Palm OS devices in this category. I have had a Handspring Visor Deluxe for nearly 3 years now. It's black and white. The are no fancy graphics or sounds. However it keeps a mean phone list, address book and calendar. As a Physician, I like the third party software that is a handy quick reference for pharmaceutical dosing information. I have absolutely no reason to upgrade to anything better.

SR-71 Blackbird

[Anonymous Coward]

The SR-71 Blackbird aircraft was in many ways 20-30 years ahead of time when it was first created and put into service. An amazing piece of engineering and materials technology.

Casio Scientific Calculator

[nanojath]

When I was a Junior in high school - 1989 - I bought a Casio scientific calculator, solar powered with a lithium cell back-up, for about 30 dollars. Through high school Trig and Pre-calculus, three college calculus classes, and a chemistry undergraduate degree, I used the thing a ton and it took a beating in the process. 14 years later I'm still using it... and the battery is still good (I guess that solar cell is doing its job.

Oh and another thing - when I first started college, I bought a single Sony double-density 3.5 floppy disk. That's 12 years ago and it still works. Yes, yes, I know, floppies are obsolete... but really, I bought a box of 3.5s (figuring they'd be a lifetime supply) and I'm lucky if I get a dozen rewrites out of them. That original floppy has been overwritten literally thousands of times. What gives with that?

Re:Washer and Dryer

[Anonymous Coward]

My father got a Western Electric 500 telephone about 1946, it was in daily use until about 1991 (about 45 years), outlasting three teenagers, cars, washers, refrigerators, water heaters, the roof to the house.... Heck, lubricate the rotary dial and it would STILL work. (Remind me why the telephone monopoly was wrong.)

Colt M1911

[JesseL]

This is a firearm originally designed in the 1900's that is still one of the most popular designs of all time. The 1911 is considered by many to be as accurate, reliable, and rugged as any of the most modern firearms available. I inherited one that had originally been made for the U.S. Army in 1918 and belonged to my great-grandfather; it still functions perfectly to this day.

Re:Colt M1911

[good soldier svejk]

AK-47 is not that good, in fact, it's a pretty piss poor rifle in accuracy. The only reason people use it is that it is cheap. There is a saying, "The only people who buy AK-47's are people who can't afford M-16's."

This is kind of a metaphysical issue. Each system is the pinnacle of its design philosophy.

The Kalashnikov is inherently rugged and tolerant of environmental variables. AK derivatives operate flawlessly in sand and water, at any temperature. Years ago I read an interview with Uziel Gal where he said that was why IMI (meaning Israel Galili and himself) chose the AK as the basis for the Galil. Israeli combat experience showed the AKs to be the only weapon to operate at or near 100% efficiency in desert combat.

The AR-15 is a totally different animal. It is a beautifully balanced and elegant design. While the AK was based on proven designs and manufacturing methods, the AR-15 was ground breaking. New materials and manufacturing techniques made it feather light, robust and easy to produce. Eugene Stoner's baby was an unbelievably efficient weapon. As you say it was more accurate than the AKs. Its ammunition was also (at the time, AKs have caught up) lighter, which meant you could carry more of it, and more destructive. The lightweight small bore cartridge also made the weapon easier to use.

Unfortunately, the AR-15s strength turned out to be its weakness. It was such a finely balanced design that the slightest change in specifications completely destroyed its functionality. This is painfully clear from the history of the M-16 in Vietnam. While the AR-15 was highly prized in that war, the "militarized" M-16 was a disaster. To the casual observer, the differences between the two weapons were trivial. The M-16 had faster twist rifling, which improved the already excellent accuracy but drastically reduced the bullet's destructiveness. The bullet retained stability after impact while the AR-15's tumbled. The M-16 had a plunger on the right side of the receiver for forcing the bolt closed when jammed with debris. Forcing a debris jammed bolt home is probably not going to solve your problem and can permanently damage the weapon. But neither of these changes explained the shocking reduction in reliability between the two designs. The AR-15's reliability had been outstanding, both in tests and in combat. The M-16 was terrible. GI's and parental complaints were so voluminous they sparked congressional hearings. What had changed? Believe it or not the cause of this unreliability, which probably killed hundreds of GIs (and wounded thousands), was a simple change in the type of gunpowder in the cartridge. Against Stoner's advice the DOD had changed from a Winchester bar powder to their standard ball powder. The higher chamber pressure and temperature, as well as the dirtier combustion, completely destroyed the functionality of the weapon. It took years of tweaking to bring the M16 back to reasonable reliability standards. The problems never occurred in testing because the Army never bothered testing the new powder. The M16 evaluation was all don with Stoner's Winchester powder.

By contrast, the AK variants can digest any ammo you cram into the magazine with roughly equal efficiency. The Russians learned there lesson during WWII when brass shortages forced them to use steel cartridge cases. If you can cram it in the chamber, the AK will fire it, eject it and load another.

The AR-15 is a fine piece of engineering. Israeli soldiers who used the Galil like it because of its balance and light weight. And for theIDF's current uses it is probably perfect. But it isn't any lighter than the AK-74 and accuracy is a secondary consideration. Reliability, durability, flexibility and quantity are more important. The Kalashnikov wins on all those counts. For most militaries I think the AK-74 is a better choice.

I also think the Browning Hi Power was a much better design than the 1911, and only twelve years newer (design not production).

$.02...blah, blah

old phones

[tomzyk]

My parents still have a rotary [pulse, dial...] phone in their kitchen. It still works just fine (after about 25 years of use from a family of 7) so there hasn't been a need to replace it. Although impatient people complain that you still have to wait a full 5 seconds longer to complete your outbound phone calls compared to touch-tone phones. (oh the horror!)

A friend of my younger brother was over there a few years ago and had to ask my dad how to use the phone because he'd never seen a phone without a number-pad on it. Pathetic. Times are changin and these young whipper-snappers aren't learning things that we took for granted. Like learning to read the time off of the face of a (non-digital) clock.

Anyways... back to the subject.

TV, telephones, wallclocks, pocket calculators (solar powered ones too), etc... there are a bunch of pieces of technology I use every day that have lasted beyond initial expectation.

I wish I could say the same thing about computers now-a-days. (Most are considered "old" or "out of date" within 6 months.)

The Wright's four basic airplane controls.

[DunbarTheInept]

Look at any aircraft, and the main movement is governent by these four:

Throttle.
Ailerons (via "wing warping).
Elevator.
Rudder.

That basic configuration hasn't changed since Orville and Wilber used it in 1903.

Not the engine itself...

[TWX_the_Linux_Zealot]

... the spark plug.

Spark plugs have not changed at all in at least 60 years, as far as the OEM styles go. They have been remarkably similar since their original designs, a graphite core surrounded by a ceramic insulator surrounded by a metallic threaded ring. Amazing.

Re:The Internal Combustion Engine

[good soldier svejk]

with the exception of fuel injection and emissions "add-ons", has changed very little in the last 50 years.

Actually, fuel injection is older than 50 years. Daimler-Benz aircraft motors were using it by 1932, although it took Rolls Royce another eleven years to add it to the Merlin. Other than the belated addition of FI, the Merlin was a remarkable design. It was all aluminium, dual-stage supercharged unit with four valves and two plugs per cylinder. The exhaust valves were filled with sodium to improve cooling.

I think the biggest changes in internal combustion engines over the last half century are the addition of solid state electronic management and improved production methods and materials. These have rendered high end technologies like the Merlin sported practical for mass production and distribution.

GalileoSpace Probe!

[Arcturax]

Launched October 18, 1989 by the Space Shuttle Atlantis. It had some technical problems in 1991 (high gain antenna wouldn't deploy) but they were able to use the low gain antenna to send data back at a vastly slower rate).

It became the first spacecraft to take a close up photo of an asteriod and when it reacher Jupiter in 1995, the first space craft to drop a probe into a gas giant. It's mission was to last only until 1997, but it was given a two year extension. The mission continued another three years AFTER the extension, sending its last scientific data back in November 2002 as it passed the moon Amalthea. In August of this year it will burn up in Jupiters atmosphere.

The spacecraft has operated over twice as long as expected and has taken three times the radiation it was designed for, and still it mostly works. The plunge into Jupiter is because the craft is running low on fuel and they would rather burn it up than risk having it possibly slam into Europa, contaminating it before we can check for native ba cterial life there.

While it's certainly not lasted as long as Pioneer, it has taken one hell of a beating from the intense radiation of Jupiter, the tidal stresses of orbiting the gas giant and its planet sized moons as well as flying through toxic (and possibly caustic) volcanic plumes kicked off of the surface of Io by eruptions.

So I would say that Gallileo is in fact in the same class as Pioneer when it comes to be being built tough.

Not a //e but still...

[RealisticWeb.com]

The server running our family domain is an old SE/30. It runs totaly headless because the onboard video went out, the ram is maxed way past what you are supposed to be able to put in it, it runs MK linux, and at last count was hosting 15 domains. The surpizing thing is just how fast it is! I never notice any lag when I connect and I'm about 1500 miles away!

DC-3

[perfessor multigeek]

No doubt, the SR-71 is/was purty, but nothing ever has beat the record of the good old Gooney Bird.

So durable that eventually the FAA gave up and declared it exempt from end-of-life regulations.
So durable that some have been flown under combat conditions with a third of the wing blown off.
The only thirty year old cargo plane ever to be reconfigured as a combat gun platform (the Dragon, a.k.a. Spooky, a.k.a. Puff the Magic Dragon)
Rebuilt as a turboprop and outperformed new aircraft.
Left abandoned in a field of snow up past the Arctic Circle for an entire winter and then, dug out from under the snow, started up, and flown home.

No longer manufactured after 1946, still in use to this day.

The one, the only, The DC-3!

Yay!

Rustin

I have an FX-502p

[mangu]

Bought it in 1981. And, what's more (*much* more), it's still in its second set of batteries. Amazing low power consumption.

The Great Wall of China

[fname]

I think we have to remember that "technology" is not really synonymous with electronics/ computers. And the original example was more of an item than a class of technologies.

So with that in mind, I nominate the Great Wall of China, still standing after all these years. I think it qualifies whereas things like the Pyramids don't, in that they never served any real function. I bet the wall would still work pretty well today, if there was a war. Not perfect, but good.

If the goal was to pick classes of technologies, I think most of the responses here are exceptionally shortsighted. I think sail technology, the steam engine and the wheel had a lot more staying power, and who knew?

I think there are some good specific examples. Any real old bridges out there? Panama Canal is great, 'course it was designed to last a long time. I bet there are some irrigation ditches somewhere that were dug thousands of years ago, and still work. Stepped hillsides fall into that category, too. Most people who built them probably paid no heed to them lasting longer.

Pioneer is unique, because there was really no way to maintain it, and it was a 1 (or 2) shot deal. Those HP calcs are fine, but have more than 10% lasted this long? I'd love t hear about some scarecrow that's been scaring away crows for 200 years without a person laying his hands on it. What's the longest any manufactured item has lasted (and remained useful) for without human intervention? Kudos to the winner.