MikeKerner at roadrunner.com
Mon May 15 12:11:38 EDT 2017
Unfortunately, there are very expensive pieces of gear that have controls
on them that for one reason or another cannot be controlled by OS's newer
than XP. I happen to have one, here. It cost $750,000. There is no
dealing with the OS issue without replacing the control, and that is also
extremely expensive, on the order of $400,000, so you would not replace the
control without replacing the whole unit. M$, when they decided to dump
the XP paradigm, just like when they got rid of DOS, broke upgradability
for ATM's, machine tools and CMM's, X-Ray and MRI machines, PBX's, etc.
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> David V Glasgow wrote:
> > I recently finished a fixed term contract working for a pretty IT
> > savvy NHS Trust. The NHS has been forced by central government to
> > reallocate IT (and other infrastructure) monies to front line
> > services. They are also trapped by legacy software with dependencies
> > on old (and proprietary) Windows systems and software. Now obviously
> > stupid, but actually historic stupidity which was in the 1990s
> > disguised as good business and standard practice.
> > Not to mention the Clinical Information Systems which look and behave
> > as if it is still the 1990’s.
> > Apart from that, everything is fine.
> That's the sad reality of so many security budgets: they don't become
> adequate until after it's too late.
> The dependency on older unsafe software versions is one that's always
> mystified me. I once worked for a vendor whose clients included several
> large hospital networks, and one of them required us to deliver our app in
> a way that would maintain compatibility with IE 6, years after Microsoft
> warned customers to stop using it.
> Subsequent versions of a software are generally supersets of features
> found in earlier versions, with the only things missing as we go forward
> being bugs.
> When written to spec, it should move forward gracefully. Microsoft has
> done a better job of maintaining backward compatibility than most.
> So if someone writes an app that doesn't work going forward, dependent on
> things specific to an outdated system, in effect their app is dependent on
> For any org to consider bug-dependent software "mission critical" should
> raise eyebrows. For a hospital it seems even more serious.
> But I understand how budgets tend to gloss over things like this. And
> this week, even the most reluctant orgs do too.
> Richard Gaskin
> Fourth World Systems
> Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
> Ambassador at FourthWorld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
On the second day, God created the oceans.
On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
and did a little diving.
And God said, "This is good."
More information about the Use-livecode