• HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I mean, there is still an industry of Cobol engineers maintaining mainframe code for banks from the 80s.

    my gramps, that’s not the beacon of good business practice you think it is 🤣

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      The question at hand is whether or not there are enough engineers to feasibly support Windows 98. Try and work on your reading comprehension.

      • HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        No. The question at hand is whether you expect any company, or any person, to indefinitely fix and maintain legacy systems. And yes, your argument is indefinite support because you want the purchasing machine to be granted use of the software in perpetuity, you want it to never lose access to the software. You provided no deadline by which anyone is allowed to stop fixing things that broke. And yes, things break naturally as a function of time.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          And yes, things break naturally as a function of time.

          Why don’t you go ahead and explain the exact mechanism that causes software to change and would cause a computer to interpret it differently over time, without a human intervening and updating it to break it.

          Don’t worry, we’ll wait.