|
|
I'm pretty much with you on the phone - but mine is a ten year old HP http://www.gsmarena.com/hp_ipaq_hw6515-1312.php[^] which I got when my iPaq organiser died as it meant I didn't have to carry two devices to get the GPS / Organiser / spreadsheet / my written apps I wanted (this was well prior to iPhone and loads before iPad).
Still works, still has multiple week battery life...but I might junk it for a simpler one as I carry my Nexus 7 with me everywhere now and only use the HP as a phone! 
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I never needed that much functionality - I'm surrounded with computers (desktop/laptop from office and desktop at home) and when I'm moving I'm driving. So I need the phone part and the meetings only (I have 25 slots for that, that can serve me for about a month)...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
X460 served my parents till death. Got replaced with a similar Nokia, but that is too complex, with too small too crafted icons, too many ways on the start screen.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, it's a flip-phone. Excellent for being dramatic.  
|
|
|
|
|
A good example of old software that works are games, I have a 22 year old Sega Megadrive and a bunch of games that still work just fine, like FIFA '95, the only football game I'll ever need.
However people like new shiny things, sure marketing and constant updates generate more cash for manufacturers but I think most people get bored with what they have. Why else would EA also create FIFA 96, FIFA 97, FIFA 98, FIFA 99
FIFA 2000, FIFA 2001, FIFA 2002, FIFA 2003, FIFA 2004, FIFA 2005, FIFA 06, FIFA 07, FIFA 08, FIFA 09, FIFA 10, FIFA 11, FIFA 12, FIFA 13 and FIFA 14 and still generate sales, even though the actual gameplay hasn't changed in 20 years (and how could it?)
|
|
|
|
|
I think games are a different matter than other regular type of software.
gameplay should have improved especially with better AI!
graphics will also change and improved with new versions.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
The same goes for most software though, interfaces are updated to keep them fresh and minor improvements are made along with a few new features. The only real difference is that you can always count on the graphics in games improving, where as desktop software is often just a sideways move to make it more fashionable.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that Microsoft's message that XP was a '13 year old', 'Operating System' is marketing genius - they made 'User Interface' synonymous with 'Operating system' in the minds of the public, but it's just snake oil.
The big Operating System change was / is going from 32 bit to 64 bit. The rest is menus and utility programs, and some new APIs.
XP isn't really old, and Windows 8 isn't all new, just a way for their Marketing people to say 'Buy this New Thing'.
|
|
|
|
|
If its hard drive had not passed out, I like to think I would still have my WinXP computer from 2004 serving audio and video files.
I managed to keep it clean and responsive during eight years, without a single reinstallation. And I clearly plan to keep my actual one this long.
Maybe the phenomenon you're describing has something to do with 'planned obsolescence' (not sure of this translation, though).
[Flags]
public enum Bool {
True, False, ForSure, Maybe, ProbablyNot, Depends, NotDecidedYet, Undefined
}
private interface IStealth { }
|
|
|
|
|
Forogar wrote: Do you have a problem with a culture of constant update where updates are
largely unnecessary and probably driven entirely by marketing?
Yes.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I'm definitely a fan of progress.
Windows OSes: I have no great love of XP. Always thought Win2K was a better OS. After 18-24 months XP always seemed to "slow down" requiring a re-install. XP's security issues are infamous. Windows 7 is top to bottom a WAY better OS. I'm an Apple guy at home and my employer has outfitted me with a Windows 7 machine so I have no experience with Win 8. From what I hear - I'm not missing much.
Smart Phones: I came late-ish to smart phone nirvana. Until about 3 years ago all I had was a free flip-phone. Then my employer got me a BlackBerry. It was nothing to write home about.  Messaging was good but internet and apps were abysmal. Three months later the company switched to iPhones (I got a 4S). Amazing difference! Changed my world - the way I organize my life, the way I travel - the whole shebang. Two years later they upgraded me to a 5S. Nice incremental update. Faster, better screen - touch ID is good. Pays to stay fairly current but the folks who MUST have the latest iPhone (or Samsung S#, Note#, Nexus#, etc...) on the day it comes out (at any price) are mental.
I guess what it comes down to for me is: Steady progress is great but every step is not always positive or required by everyone.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
I've always liked clean, basic graphics - Win 8.1 is very nice in that respect. As far as speed and extra features, I agree, you're not missing much. Seems every developer is installing Classic Shell to get back the start menu anyway, since the full-screen start is pretty jarring for people's focus.
|
|
|
|
|
If a device in isolation performs the required task, then don't bother upgrading it.
However, if the device needs to interact with the public, some of whom seem hell-bent on destroying it, then upgrades may be appropriate.
At that point, I don't blame marketing, I blame those that seek to destroy.
|
|
|
|
|
When Windows XP was released back in 2001, it was far from being perfect, it underwent a massive change with Service Pack 2 until it really remained pretty much unchanged for the rest of its lifetime.
I think the difference today is that the whole bugfixing/update process has accelerated, and I really believe that it has become more of a culture rather than a necessity. Maybe not the best example, but I remember how my parents owned this really massive, made in GDR 1970 bedroom cupboard for about thirty years until it got replaced (not because it was broken but it was too big) and that was moved, which means disassembled at the old place and reassembled at the new, many times without really showing any signs of age or damage. Now when I look at the quality of the wood and how much you have to pay for these cupboards at IKEA today, it's no comparison. You can dismantle these things one, maybe two times until the boltings start to get slack. But it's not really a surprise when you think about it. Things like the GDR-made cupboard were "made to last forever", but that's not true anymore. It's all about consumption today, and if it weren't for economical reasons, people wouldn't be encouraged to replace their fully functioning mobile phones etc. after a year or two max. And things like planned obsolescence come into play, too. Think of lightbulbs and nylon tights. Lightbulbs are constructed to last about 1000 hours until they fail, and nylon tights are also constructed to fail - they have to be because the original nylon was so durable that women wouldn't buy stockings so often like they have to do ever since. And there are more examples, predetermined breaking points in headphone or charger cables... engineers are forced to build products that eventually fail although they got the brains to come up with something that would last beyond comparison, and that's the real scandal.
Coming back to software updates, I sometimes got the impression that people seem to be never happy with a specific version of a program these days. As soon as they got the latest version installed, they start to yearn for v.Next, and they want to see it delivered today rather than tomorrow. The heart beats higher when a new update is available from the app store, and although you can't really tell what's changed between the old and the new version all too often, they feel relief because the next new update has finally arrived.
|
|
|
|
|
FIorian Schneidereit wrote: it underwent a massive change with Service Pack 2 until it really remained pretty much unchanged for the rest of its lifetime
SP3, actually.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of 'they don't build them like that anymore' comes from survivor bias.
Cheap junk knock-down furniture was made in the 1960's and 1970's too, it's chipped plastic laminate and wobbly, spindly legs are mostly in landfills now, out of sight.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows Server 2008 R2 kicks ass and is way more than marketing hype.
Windows 7 is vastly superior to XP. Despite some of the UI pieces, Windows 8.x is better than Windows 7.
Is there marketing in every product? Yes. Often that marketing is annoying as hell, but that doesn't mean they aren't better.
|
|
|
|
|
I still see a lot of POS systems out there that are DOS based.
Reason being?
They are stable
They get the Job done
They are small
Their shortcuts once learned make sense, and make data entry easy
There really are a lot of legacy applications that still have fairly wide adoption because of their original well thought our design, and the fact that the role they fulfill hasn't changed over the years.
[edit] Woohoo, this is my 1000 point in Code Project! [edit]
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen two in the last month that were obviously written in Pascal.
One can assume that they weren't broke.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: POS systems
"Point of Sale" systems is what I assumed you meant.
Other people may have another meaning for the "POS" acronym!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
I use an XP box and today it downloaded and installed 9 critical patches.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Forogar wrote: Do you have a problem with a culture of constant update where updates are largely unnecessary and probably driven entirely by marketing
Yes. Yes I do. Not limited to software/technology.
The lack of critical/analytical thinking drives me nuts sometimes. Is the new product demonstrably better than the old? If not, why did someone make the new (other than the reason given by Forogar).
|
|
|
|
|
My car has software (well, technically firmware). It's 14 years old. It hasn't needed a constant stream of updates to keep functioning.
Forogar wrote: without a constant stream of patches and corrections that software will somehow just stop doing it's job properly
That's exactly my definition of broken and buggy software. I find it a never ending source of amusement that on smart phones, if the software isn't broken and buggy and in constant need of updates, its perceived as bad.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
There is no such thing as absolutely perfect software. Absolutely perfect software is only achievable with an infinite amount of time, money, and resources which don't exist in the real world. All one can hope for is that a good testing cycle/philosophy statistically reduces the chances of the one or more paths through the software are not exercised that were not covered during the testing phase.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
