5 ms·

Many of the postings for 95 and 3.1 appear to be in the field of health care. Perhaps this is an important message to companies attempting to create rapid inno

• _delirium 16y ago
  If it's anything like the way specialist science-lab IT works, I can definitely see that. There's plenty of chemistry labs with ancient OSs on some machines because they have some piece of equipment that doesn't have drivers for anything newer. Basically a disconnect between lifecycles: a good piece of chemistry equipment is supposed to last 20+ years, especially if it's doing something relatively routine and well-understood, whereas software seems not to usually be intended to stick around for 20 years.
  • silentbicycle 16y ago
    > Basically a disconnect between lifecycles: a good piece of chemistry equipment is supposed to last 20+ years, especially if it's doing something relatively routine and well-understood, whereas software seems not to usually be intended to stick around for 20 years. This is a good observation, and would probably make a great topic for a much larger discussion/essay.
    • mikecarlucci 16y ago
      Consistency is huge. It's amazing what some of those guys will get out of their equipment. I spent some time talking with a guy who builds data acquisition equipment. Most of his customers started using his sensors in the 80s and until the system either breaks beyond repair or the entire team of scientists has retired, they want to keep the exact same setup. Amazing dedication, but the benefits of testing with the same equipment over many years can lead to some great observations over the long term.
• blasdel 16y ago
  You don't understand -- this is the result of rapid innovation in the health sector. Stuff takes a long time to come to market!