Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #218945

Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work?

From	Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	alt.folklore.computers
Subject	Re: What is the oldest computer that could be used today for real work?
Date	2021-09-23 13:12 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<siichh$kao$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(5 earlier) <sigker$kfe$1@dont-email.me> <JYR2J.36706$rsCb.11019@fx01.iad> <1764791413.654100101.121068.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> <sii4be$q2r$1@dont-email.me> <156764.654108760.351531.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>

Show all headers | View raw

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:

> Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2021-09-23, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> In article <20210918155210.02c1c46cfbb0456d26a4ee94@eircom.net>,
>>>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot  <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Sep 2021 00:49:00 -0600
>>>>>>> Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 9/18/21 12:27 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I suppose the real question is why not recompile them to take
>>>>>>>>> advantage of the newer hardware. I know during Y2K work that a lot of
>>>>>>>>> instances of lost source code came to light, are people still running
>>>>>>>>> binaries for which there is no source ?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Why recompile something just for the sake of recompiling it?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If it's working just fine and is exhibiting no symptoms, why mess with it?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yeah I get it, you might be depending on an old undocumented
>>>>>>> compiler bug or you might fall foul of a new one so why risk the
>>>>>>> new shiny compiler that might get 10% better performance and might
>>>>>>> break the application.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> By that logic, one should never upgrade anything if it can
>>>>>> be avoided.  An operating system upgrade in particular would
>>>>>> be terribly fraught.
>>>> 
>>>> s/would be/is/
>>>> 
>>>> Especially if you have no mechanism for parallel testing
>>>> prior to the cutover.
>>>> 
>>>>>> It strikes me how much process we've built predicated on the
>>>>>> presumed difficulty of testing and qualifying software for
>>>>>> production use.
>>>>> 
>>>>> You only update software when the benefit justifies the cost.
>>>> 
>>>> Sadly, people now update software whenever the vendor tells them to
>>>> (or does it behind their back).
>>>> 
>>>> Last year I heard that a number of 911 sites went down (i.e. no
>>>> dial tone) for at least half an hour thanks to a buggy Windows
>>>> update that was pushed out to them.
>>> 
>>> I hate to say that’s what they get for using windows, but…
>> 
>> All these stories about companies paying ransoms.
>> Seldom do they place the blame directly on Windows.
>> 
>> Too be fair, poor backup and recovery probably plays a role too.
>> 
>
> I was going to say that windows is just a bigger target than Linux, but
> Linux is used extensively in servers and mission-critical situations, and
> you seldom hear about a successful attack targeting Linux. You’re right
> about poor backup software and procedures.
>
> Someone recently posted here about ransomware that just lay low and
> corrupted backups for a while before it struck, but don’t good systems
> checksum the backups and verify a good one? Duplicity does that, and also
> does a test restore periodically. I have had occasion to restore some files
> a few times, and I’m grateful to have it, although I also do some of my own
> backups.

I'm not and never have been a professional system admin.
It seems to me the system doing backups should only be connected to the
disk farm.  That would make corrupting backups an unlikely event.

> I did prefer the system I had previously, whose name I have forgotten, that
> had a better UI, but they dropped support for individual users in favor of
> corporate licenses.

Backup systems?  For my home system cron driven rsync with periodic
changes to the backup USB sticks.  Couldn't be much simpler.
Rsync just creates another copy, getting to the backup is just a matter
of copying.

-- 
Dan Espen

Thread

csiph-web