Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why OldTech Keeps Kicking

Posted by Zonk on from the they-don't-want-to-go-on-the-cart dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "In 1991 Stewart Alsop, the editor of InfoWorld, predicted that the last mainframe computer would be unplugged by 1996. Just last month, IBM introduced the latest version of its mainframe, and technologies from the golden age of big-box computing continue to be vital components in modern infrastructure. The New York Times explores why old technology is still around, using radio and the mainframe as perfect examples. 'The mainframe is the classic survivor technology, and it owes its longevity to sound business decisions. I.B.M. overhauled the insides of the mainframe, using low-cost microprocessors as the computing engine. The company invested and updated the mainframe software, so that banks, corporations and government agencies could still rely on the mainframe as the rock-solid reliable and secure computer for vital transactions and data, while allowing it to take on new chores like running Web-based programs.'"

4 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Is it really "old" tech? by omeomi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As is the radio. I'll never understand why people think Television should have killed off the radio. Radio is still around for one major reason: It's hard (and usually illegal) to watch TV while driving. If anything is going to kill radio, it's the advent of the podcast, which in a lot of ways is close enough to the function of radio to be a real threat.

    --
    ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
  2. Old Technologies that are still kicking... by FranTaylor · · Score: 5, Informative

    The x86 architecture

    The QWERTY keyboard

    SATA (yes, folks, a serial version of the old IBM AT bus!)

    Drive letters, DOS devices

    Does anyone actually use the tar program for its original purpose anymore?

  3. no built in obsolescence by apodyopsis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to make CD players for one of the tech giants, as such I was in China alot. When I say "make" I'll be more specific - I wrote the firmware.

    I remember vividly a conversation with one of the chinese project managers. I was discussing the build quality of a new CD player for the US markets. It had that brown cardboard like PCB that the racks leap off if you wave a soldering iron in the general vicinity. The PCBS, the unit front, the enfire casework was glued together with a hot glue gun. The radio tuning circuit was wire wrapped around a pencil and then "frozen" in place with dripped wax whilst the software was expected to adapt to mask any tolerance issues. The manager and his team gave it a projected life span of 18 months, then the consumer would be back to buy another, he was really enthusiastic about the repeat business.

    *That* is why old tech survives because it was built to last, not with built in obsolescence. And no, I never brought a CD player from my employer ever again.

  4. Re:Is it really "old" tech? by Grave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having just done an upgrade to our accounting software this morning, and going through a number of small but still very real headaches, I can appreciate why the guys managing a major bank's information systems is damned glad that IBM does things the way they do. That's precisely why the mainframe still exists. When 5-nines uptime still isn't good enough, you don't adopt a radically different system just for the sake of change or progress. When billions of dollars rest on the absolute reliability of your computer infrastructure, migration and change are to be approached with the utmost caution, and anything that reduces complexity and presents a smaller degree of change is a godsend.