2 ms·
So end-of-life releases that have been replaced with newer builds? Any application that doesn't survive the progression of technology doesn't deserve to-- softw
by intpx 6y ago
So end-of-life releases that have been replaced with newer builds? Any application that doesn't survive the progression of technology doesn't deserve to-- software requires maintenance. We expect hardware to get bigger/faster/stronger but are unwilling to hold software to the same standard?
I am wracking my brain but cannot think of a single application that I ran on previous epochs of hardware (whether it be 32bit, PowerPC, Itanium, or anything else) that I am now missing out on.FOSS has really mitigated this a ton too because if there was a good idea from a defunct codebase, inevitably a project would spring up to fill that void.
Professionally, legacy software is the bane of my existence because I am expected to move heaven and earth to make crappy, long outdated and inherently insecure proprietary enterprise apps work on modern networks with modern operating systems and modern security requirements. Let it all burn.
- jtbayly 6y agoSoftware that runs perfectly fine, performs just what I need, and that I already paid for, that has no security implications... and you want me to now start paying monthly for the privilege of using the same software. No thanks. I know software requires maintenance. When it’s cheaper to buy another computer that runs the old software just fine than paying for “updates” and “improvements” and “bug fixes” that do nothing for me, I think people are going to stop paying for such “updates”.