TR Forums

What are everyone's thoughts about Businesses that are still major users of computer equipment that is so old that becomes impossible get any Support at all. What is worse the storage media/Drives, the attachment ports, File Systems, File Formats, and etc, has been not been in use for so long that badly that badly need Data Can not be recovered at all. These Businesses are so entirely dependent on such hardware, that if the systems fail, the Company goes out of business.

Case in point: 8" FDD and Floppies. Early PDPs Series. 8-Bit Micros with CP/M. Etc.

If the existence of their business is critically dependent on said equipment, they'd better have spares (or at least a source of spares) at the ready, or they're just one component failure (or accident, or natural disaster) away from being wiped out. If you don't plan for those kinds of contingencies, you probably deserve to go out of business.

just brew it! wrote:

If the existence of their business is critically dependent on said equipment, they'd better have spares (or at least a source of spares) at the ready, or they're just one component failure (or accident, or natural disaster) away from being wiped out. If you don't plan for those kinds of contingencies, you probably deserve to go out of business.

If I had the knowledge and skill-set to keep such ancient system in a working state, I would be afraid to go work for any company still using hardware so old. For one thing both of us will end up stuck with other. For Example, they can't get rid of me due to me being the only one who can keep the system running. And of course, I can't quit due to being over-specialized.

Well sure, if that's your only marketable skill. But if you let yourself get that overly specialized and don't make any attempt to diversify your skillset, that's your own damn fault.

The only real job security in tech is making sure you always have skills that are in demand. That strategy has kept me continuously employed for nearly 4 decades, across multiple industries (telecom, finance, HPC, defense, transportation, data storage) and at pretty much every level of the stack (FPGA firmware and assembly language all the way up to database applications).

...and then there's the management career track, which appeals to some people. But I decided fairly early on that I'd rather stay on the technical side of things. If I ever become a PHB just shoot me.

just brew it! wrote:

If the existence of their business is critically dependent on said equipment, they'd better have spares (or at least a source of spares) at the ready, or they're just one component failure (or accident, or natural disaster) away from being wiped out. If you don't plan for those kinds of contingencies, you probably deserve to go out of business.

I still see instances of Windows 3.1 or 3.11 WFW in use.
The attitude of hey it works so why should we change it comes back to bite so many people.

I understand the situation all too well but getting people in charge to understand the seriousness of the problem is hard to do.
You have no backups, no spare parts, parts are almost impossible to find.
If this computer fries tonight what happens?
Statistics show that if a business looses its data it is usually gone in 6 months to a year.

We have the chance to fix the issue right now, this is how much its gonna cost, you decide.

This kind of tough talk is needed for any business with no backups, old hardware, no systems security, or really old servers.

One note I would like to make is that upgrades are almost never impossible. Only that time, hardware, and labor costs go up the older the hardware is.

If you have a mainframe that still works you can use a scraper to get the data out.
If you have a computer that still works you can convert databases to csv or tsv to get your data out.

The real trouble starts when the computer will no longer boot, or the hdd crashes.

Using old hardware/software isn't the end of the world as long as you have an escape plan (and actually test/understand it).

Aranarth wrote:

I still see instances of Windows 3.1 or 3.11 WFW in use.
The attitude of hey it works so why should we change it comes back to bite so many people.

I understand the situation all too well but getting people in charge to understand the seriousness of the problem is hard to do.

If you have a mainframe that still works you can use a scraper to get the data out.
If you have a computer that still works you can convert databases to csv or tsv to get your data out.

The real trouble starts when the computer will no longer boot, or the hdd crashes.

Pray tell what is a scapper? I have zero experience with Mainframes and Minicomputers. Or for that matter, working in Information Technology.

I might be misremember what I have read or for that matter, entire mistaken: But doesn't the US Federal Government and US Military Buy new 8" Disks and FDDs and new and better parts for old systems? This in areas such as Old Airports, Missile Silos, and etc? Both of them only managed to do this due being the only users of large installations of such ancient computer systems and willing and able to out the rear, along an arm and leg, to get such support.

They can't upgrade to more modern and better systems due to be required to shut down the Operations of the Facilities in order to properly do this.

It's all fine if it's done in a controlled and understood way. e.g. Boeing 747-400's still use 3.5" floppy disks to update their navigation systems, every 4 weeks. These planes entered service between 1989 and 2005, according to Wikipedia, and there are 71 passenger and 181 freighter ones still in service.

Topinio wrote:

It's all fine if it's done in a controlled and understood way. e.g. Boeing 747-400's still use 3.5" floppy disks to update their navigation systems, every 4 weeks. These planes entered service between 1989 and 2005, according to Wikipedia, and there are 71 passenger and 181 freighter ones still in service.

Is there someone still making 3.5" floppy disks?

whm1974 wrote:

Pray tell what is a scapper? I have zero experience with Mainframes and Minicomputers. Or for that matter, working in Information Technology.

Scraper not scapper. A piece of software that runs the application and somehow captures the data out of the screen buffer or from the data stream. It's a kludge, but may be the only way to pull data out of legacy systems that don't provide an API or data export function.

The approach is not limited to legacy application access either. Companies still use this approach to pull data from other companies' web sites, often without authorization. IIRC Travelocity originally used scrapers to gather flight data from the airlines' web sites.

whm1974 wrote:

I might be misremember what I have read or for that matter, entire mistaken: But doesn't the US Federal Government and US Military Buy new 8" Disks and FDDs and new and better parts for old systems? This in areas such as Old Airports, Missile Silos, and etc? Both of them only managed to do this due being the only users of large installations of such ancient computer systems and willing and able to out the rear, along an arm and leg, to get such support.

They can't upgrade to more modern and better systems due to be required to shut down the Operations of the Facilities in order to properly do this.

As recently as a few years ago they were still using 8" floppy disks in the nuclear missile launch systems, which were designed at the height of the Cold War. I do not know whether these systems are still in use.

whm1974 wrote:

Is there someone still making 3.5" floppy disks?

IIRC all of the major manufacturers ceased production a decade (or more) ago. There may be smaller operations still producing them. Or it might be all "new old stock" at this point.

Thanks @just brew it! for the explanation. Like I said I have never been involved with anything remotely related to Mainframes or Minicomputers. IT or that matter even Data Processing.

When I was fresh out of High School and went to Community College, I got really annoyed at the instructor for using such ancient terms such as Primary Storage and Secondary Storage in the Introduction To Computers along with Introduction to Programming Courses. Nevermind that these terms were never used with Microcomputers and Personal Computers to begin with.

whm1974 wrote:

Thanks @just brew it! for the explanation. Like I said I have never been involved with anything remotely related to Mainframes or Minicomputers. IT or that matter even Data Processing.

As I noted, use of scrapers isn't limited to legacy mainframes. They get used on the web.

whm1974 wrote:

When I was fresh out of High School and went to Community College, I got really annoyed at the instructor for using such ancient terms such as Primary Storage and Secondary Storage in the Introduction To Computers along with Introduction to Programming Courses. Nevermind that these terms were never used with Microcomputers and Personal Computers to begin with.

They're still the accepted engineering terms (though they're not typically used in day-to-day conversation).

just brew it! wrote:

They're still the accepted engineering terms (though they're not typically used in day-to-day conversation).

The terms might be technically correct, but they make the person using them sound really old. What is worse, it is confusing. Try to use those terms at one the remaining actual Computer Stores and ask for Primary and Secondary Storage.

The Employees will be totally clueless. If any are not confused, it is only due to them bothering to read up on the early development of Computers.

whm1974 wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

They're still the accepted engineering terms (though they're not typically used in day-to-day conversation).

The terms might be technically correct, but they make the person using them sound really old. What is worse, it is confusing. Try to use those terms at one the remaining actual Computer Stores and ask for Primary and Secondary Storage.

The Employees will be totally clueless. If any are not confused, it is only due to them bothering to read up on the early development of Computers.

I didn't say people should use them the next time they go to a computer store. Just pointing out that it is kind of silly to complain about them being used in the context of a CS class.

whm1974 wrote:

Aranarth wrote:

I still see instances of Windows 3.1 or 3.11 WFW in use.
The attitude of hey it works so why should we change it comes back to bite so many people.

I understand the situation all too well but getting people in charge to understand the seriousness of the problem is hard to do.

If you have a mainframe that still works you can use a scraper to get the data out.
If you have a computer that still works you can convert databases to csv or tsv to get your data out.

The real trouble starts when the computer will no longer boot, or the hdd crashes.

Pray tell what is a scapper? I have zero experience with Mainframes and Minicomputers. Or for that matter, working in Information Technology.

Err its a "Scraper" my bad.

Scraper is a pace of software that fools a mainframe into thinking a person is talking to it.
It allows you to setup scripts to go through every possible screen and record the info given by a mainframe.
It typically exports to a csv file which can then be imported into excel, SQL, or whatever you like.

Aranarth wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

Aranarth wrote:

I still see instances of Windows 3.1 or 3.11 WFW in use.
The attitude of hey it works so why should we change it comes back to bite so many people.

I understand the situation all too well but getting people in charge to understand the seriousness of the problem is hard to do.

If you have a mainframe that still works you can use a scraper to get the data out.
If you have a computer that still works you can convert databases to csv or tsv to get your data out.

The real trouble starts when the computer will no longer boot, or the hdd crashes.

Pray tell what is a scapper? I have zero experience with Mainframes and Minicomputers. Or for that matter, working in Information Technology.

Err its a "Scraper" my bad.

Scraper is a pace of software that fools a mainframe into thinking a person is talking to it.
It allows you to setup scripts to go through every possible screen and record the info given by a mainframe.
It typically exports to a csv file which can then be imported into excel, SQL, or whatever you like.

Of course JBI beat me to it...

just brew it! wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

They're still the accepted engineering terms (though they're not typically used in day-to-day conversation).

The terms might be technically correct, but they make the person using them sound really old. What is worse, it is confusing. Try to use those terms at one the remaining actual Computer Stores and ask for Primary and Secondary Storage.

The Employees will be totally clueless. If any are not confused, it is only due to them bothering to read up on the early development of Computers.

I didn't say people should use them the next time they go to a computer store. Just pointing out that it is kind of silly to complain about them being used in the context of a CS class.

There was a good reason(s) I was getting annoyed. For one, everyone in the course wanted/needed to learn how to MS-DOS/Windows type PCs(Or Macintoshes). For another, every time I heard the word Mainframe/Minicomputer, I start thinking, dinosaur, fossil.

Just wondering if any Major Corporations went under due to the Museum Piece they are using for IT finally died? This merely due to someone in Upper Management or even the CEO refusal to approve the funds to replace the Mainframe from the late '50s. Or even earlier.

This was because said CEO was attempting to increasing the size of his yearly Bonus and to receive his "Golden Parachute". He plans to go elsewhere before the Company goes belly up...

whm1974 wrote:

There was a good reason(s) I was getting annoyed. For one, everyone in the course wanted/needed to learn how to MS-DOS/Windows type PCs(Or Macintoshes). For another, every time I heard the word Mainframe/Minicomputer, I start thinking, dinosaur, fossil.

What was the description of the course? Was it explicitly supposed to be teaching hands-on PC application skills? TBH what you're describing sounds like a fairly typical first-year CS course to me.

whm1974 wrote:

Just wondering if any Major Corporations went under due to the Museum Piece they are using for IT finally died? This merely due to someone in Upper Management or even the CEO refusal to approve the funds to replace the Mainframe from the late '50s. Or even earlier.

Nobody actually uses that old mainframe hardware any more (but the legacy code bases live on). IBM still makes mainframes that are backward compatible with legacy software. To this day, IBM gets a nice revenue bump every time they refresh their mainframe product line because it gets a lot of users to upgrade their systems.

Here's a good one.
Went and got the battery replaced in the car yesterday and in the course of things the car auto-locked the doors with my keys inside.
So the owner took me home to get my spare keys and on the way back admitted his computer was rather old and would I take a look.

Core 2 duo running windows xp and 2gb ram.
His son who lives in australia has been trying to get him to buy a new computer, an all in one to the tune of $1800 to $2500. ( I suspect a MAC)
Biggest complain is the graphics are getting harder to see with his aging eyes and it is slow when looking up parts online.

Has 50/10 internet.
I showed him that with a bit of luck looking around on ebay he can get a machine about 1/2 as old with a newer bigger monitor for $400 or so and I'll transfer his data for him and get everything setup for $100.

Luckily he uses it for solitaire, look up parts, email, and book keeping is done in a spreadsheet in open office.

I'll get him setup with a windows 10, core i5, 16gb ram, 240gb ssd and an external usb drive for automatic backup of his spreadsheets.
Easily do-able in his budget!

just brew it! wrote:

What was the description of the course? Was it explicitly supposed to be teaching hands-on PC application skills? TBH what you're describing sounds like a fairly typical first-year CS course to me.

I don't even remember.... This was in ~1993.

Nobody actually uses that old mainframe hardware any more (but the legacy code bases live on). IBM still makes mainframes that are backward compatible with legacy software. To this day, IBM gets a nice revenue bump every time they refresh their mainframe product line because it gets a lot of users to upgrade their systems.

Given Human Stupidity, and being prone to certain fascicles such as the "Sunk Cost". The Management could very decide not to fund the new Systems due the current Mainframe cost so much....

Nested quote fail!

just brew it! wrote:

Nested quote fail!

I quoted you just fine....

A company I used to work for was using an IBM XT to run their shipping labels... I remember working on it many times until about 2007 when I left. I heard from my old boss a few years ago (around 2014 or so) that it had finally been replaced. Fortunately they got around to it before it failed

Aranarth wrote:

Luckily he uses it for solitaire, look up parts, email, and book keeping is done in a spreadsheet in open office.

I'll get him setup with a windows 10, core i5, 16gb ram, 240gb ssd and an external usb drive for automatic backup of his spreadsheets.

Confirm if his parts database is on the web or local. By hearsay I heard a a similar use case requiring a >700GB SSD. Not terrible in terms of cost difference but something to check.

Flying Fox wrote:

Confirm if his parts database is on the web or local. By hearsay I heard a a similar use case requiring a >700GB SSD. Not terrible in terms of cost difference but something to check.

Great shout. Should probably also enquire about his backup solution.

The reason it's an issue is we all got used to ~250 GB over the last decade, but back then we had more local storage and most people weren't really using cloud storage. Sure, it's an XP box, but the EOL of OEM installation of Windows XP onto boxes leaving the production lines was as late as 2008-06-30 [1], and back then there was still a lot of demand for not-Vista so it lead to some fairly high-end machines being built with XP. This probably wasn't one of those, but it might have shipped with a decent-size HDD.

TR’s Summer 2008 system guide had

• 320 GB in the Econobox,
• 640 GB in the Grand Experiment, with an alternative option for a 750 GB drive,
• 640 GB in the Sweet Spot with alternatives of either 2 640 GB drives or a 300 GB 10k RPM system disk and a 640 GB data disk,
• the Double-Stuff Workstation suggested 2 300 GB and 2 1 TB drives, or maybe 4 1 TB drives in RAID-10

all of which is a fair bit more than 250 GB, and near-full SSD's aren't much fun.

(It did, at least, recommend Vista.)

[1] Except for "ultra-low-cost PCs" such as netbooks, they were allowed to be built out with XP until 2010-06-30

whm1974 wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

Nested quote fail!

I quoted you just fine....

Your reply to the quote is nested further in, which is backwards.

just brew it! wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

Nested quote fail!

I quoted you just fine....

Your reply to the quote is nested further in, which is backwards.

I have reasons for wanting to keep the level of quotes well, short.

1. keeps me from putting my post in the quotes.
2. This makes reading a lot easier, as the readers can see the quote I'm responding to.

whm1974 wrote:

2. This makes reading a lot easier, as the readers can see the quote I'm responding to.

It makes reading more confusing, because people are expecting the quotes to be formatted the way the forum software normally does it instead of the reverse of the way the forum software normally does it.