Tech Used to Be Bleeding Edge, Now it’s Just Bleeding | After a decade of scandals and half-assed product launches, people are no longer buying the future Big Tech is selling.::After a decade of scandals and half-assed product launches, people are no longer buying the future Big Tech is selling.
On the nose.
I used to love the bleeding edge, then my father (retired engineer) enlightened me on why important (electro-mechanical stuff) runs on older, slower, (but insanely reliable) engineering.
It’s that insanely reliable part. Kind of a hare vs the tortoise kind of thing. It’s more important to be able to predict when the tortoise arrives, than to be unpredictable like the hare, even if the hare finishes first 90% of the time. That last ten percent could be a massive cost.
Look at the ECU in a car - over the 40 years I’ve been working on cars (and my brothers and friends), we’ve seen exactly ONE ECU failure, and we think that was caused by an external event (a voltage spike).
I’ve bought a few “new tech” solutions only to have the company disappear within a couple years. For example, software for replicating a Windows install that could then install on any computer, retaining all the config and software. It was intelligent enough to update drivers as needed. They were around for 2 years, and the license has to validate against their servers. Bastards. Lol. (I’m guessing Microsoft acquired them to keep people from using it).
And that’s also why it was designed to need their servers to authenticate against: because they could charge Microsoft more if their product could be switched off remotely. They likely built the product with the aim of getting bought up. Who wants to run a company for 40 years when you can just skim a few million off of Microsoft and retire?
Lol, probably true.
They know how valuable the tech was. I still have the software and all the licensing info. Part of me feels like doing a Wireshark to see what it’s trying to do. I should’ve done that while they were around, to see the traffic.
There are free solutions that are open source, hell there’s older commercial solutions from Acronis and whatever Symantec calls Ghost these days. You made a poor choice in selecting a losing horse in a race that’s been run many times - how is that a reflection of the state of modern tech? You didn’t choose the Hare, you chose poorly.
The article and this discussion isn’t about reliable solutions vs new fangled stuff that doesn’t realise, it’s about what we do now that stuff realised and we didn’t think about what we signed up for. I’m really glad your dad encouraged you to think about the value of well-worn approaches but you’re being extremely reductive as are many in this discussion. What I find interesting about that is I feel this trend towards reductive thinking probably reflects a world seemingly happily with sliding the Overton window right inch by inch.