3 ms·

> Realistically how long would it take to modernize the software while keeping the old hardware? What value would that provide (than make-work for a couple of

by tivert 3y ago

> Realistically how long would it take to modernize the software while keeping the old hardware? What value would that provide (than make-work for a couple of software engineers)? Probably the most bang-for-the-buck effort would be get their existing software running on an emulator, and get that integrated with the hole-punch machine. An even then, I think the main value there would be to have a backup in hand if they have trouble maintaining that old computer hardware.

Freedom2 3y ago
This sounds like indoctrination to me. I generally have a different worldview that it would provide a lot of value.
- rightbyte 3y ago
  Maybe you would. But nowadays, it would probably be an agile disaster with two or three layers of managers and sales people, maybe even on different firms, if done by best practice, between you and the customer. Forget talking to the operators. KISS is a beauty of the past. There is no way the simple and straightforward text based solution would be made. It is more likely it would be a bloated mess with clouds or what not.
- tivert 3y ago
  > This sounds like indoctrination to me. I generally have a different worldview that it would provide a lot of value. That's a weird way of putting it, but I honestly think the "modernize" all the things crowd are probably the ones that "sound indoctrinated." So, if your "different worldview" says reflexively redeveloping the software would provide "a lot of value," then name the value it would provide. They've got a process that's worked for them for 40+ years, what exactly is the value in re-doing software that's only a minor part of that process? Does that "value" justify the cost? Honestly, what they've got can probably be understood more as an appliance than as an IT system, and anything developed today would almost certainly take the form of an IT system, with all the recurring cost and complexity that entails.
WJW 3y ago
I think characterizing it just as "make-work for software engineers" is too harsh. Just from a business continuity perspective there is a real benefit to being on a well-supported platform for which it is cheap and easy to source new parts. I don't know offhand how many punch card reader manufacturers still exist, but the competition is going to be a lot less than it is in (say) USB stick manufacturing. It's a difficult thing to quantify, but access to stable supply lines is surely worth more than zero.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  The punch cards will be directly controlling the loom, it looks like it is read electro-mechanically. Maintaining the card reader is presumably a minor part of maintenance for the whole loom. One person probably has the skills to maintain the weaving part and the reading part. If you replaced the input with USB or similar, you now also need someone with IT skills if that part goes wrong.
zokier 3y ago
> What value would that provide (than make-work for a couple of software engineers)? In the lingo, business continuity and risk management. When, not if but when, the current system fails, there is high chance of it being unrecoverable. Even if it were technically recoverable, can they find someone to do that work? How long will the factory stand still while the system is being recovered or replaced? In general it is more cost-effective to replace things before they fail rather than after the fact. Doubly so in these sort of cases where using the old system (in working state!) as a reference would most likely be beneficial.

by tivert 3y ago

Freedom2 3y ago

This sounds like indoctrination to me. I generally have a different worldview that it would provide a lot of value.

rightbyte 3y ago
Maybe you would. But nowadays, it would probably be an agile disaster with two or three layers of managers and sales people, maybe even on different firms, if done by best practice, between you and the customer. Forget talking to the operators. KISS is a beauty of the past. There is no way the simple and straightforward text based solution would be made. It is more likely it would be a bloated mess with clouds or what not.
tivert 3y ago
> This sounds like indoctrination to me. I generally have a different worldview that it would provide a lot of value. That's a weird way of putting it, but I honestly think the "modernize" all the things crowd are probably the ones that "sound indoctrinated." So, if your "different worldview" says reflexively redeveloping the software would provide "a lot of value," then name the value it would provide. They've got a process that's worked for them for 40+ years, what exactly is the value in re-doing software that's only a minor part of that process? Does that "value" justify the cost? Honestly, what they've got can probably be understood more as an appliance than as an IT system, and anything developed today would almost certainly take the form of an IT system, with all the recurring cost and complexity that entails.

WJW 3y ago

I think characterizing it just as "make-work for software engineers" is too harsh. Just from a business continuity perspective there is a real benefit to being on a well-supported platform for which it is cheap and easy to source new parts. I don't know offhand how many punch card reader manufacturers still exist, but the competition is going to be a lot less than it is in (say) USB stick manufacturing. It's a difficult thing to quantify, but access to stable supply lines is surely worth more than zero.

Symbiote 3y ago
The punch cards will be directly controlling the loom, it looks like it is read electro-mechanically. Maintaining the card reader is presumably a minor part of maintenance for the whole loom. One person probably has the skills to maintain the weaving part and the reading part. If you replaced the input with USB or similar, you now also need someone with IT skills if that part goes wrong.

zokier 3y ago

> What value would that provide (than make-work for a couple of software engineers)? In the lingo, business continuity and risk management. When, not if but when, the current system fails, there is high chance of it being unrecoverable. Even if it were technically recoverable, can they find someone to do that work? How long will the factory stand still while the system is being recovered or replaced? In general it is more cost-effective to replace things before they fail rather than after the fact. Doubly so in these sort of cases where using the old system (in working state!) as a reference would most likely be beneficial.