4 ms·
I think this is less a case of "don't use new tech if you don't have to" and more a case of "These are highly specialized weaving machines that were build de
by usrbinbash 3y ago
I think this is less a case of
"don't use new tech if you don't have to"
and more a case of
"These are highly specialized weaving machines that were build decades ago around using punched cards, and whatever benefit by speedup in process we would get from replacing their ancient control system with a modern one, would be dwarfed by the cost of modifying them to use that control system."
Or to say this with slightly less words:
Replacing software and a couple of computers is cheap, compared to replacing room-sized industrial machinery.
- hnlmorg 3y agoExactly this. Furthermore, it’s very common for factories to run older equipment because the cost of upgrading is higher, riskier, and shutting the factory down to do the upgrades comes with its own losses as well. It’s also worth noting that there was also modern computers in that video too. The system they used to “digitally preview” what the weave would look like. But that is a separate system from the ones that interface with the weaving machines and thus very easy and cheap to upgrade.
- rewmie 3y ago> (...) would be dwarfed by the cost of modifying them to use that control system." This should be the top comment. Cost is a critical factor. I would also stop riding the bus and drive a Ferrari to work if that option costs as much as a bus ticket. As it doesn't then I'm going to stick with the bus, but this does not make it a superior choice.
- vincnetas 3y agosome would argue that bus is better for commuting than ferrari ;)