this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2025
136 points (99.3% liked)
Mildly Interesting
22741 readers
663 users here now
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If it still works for the purpose, it is NOT obsolete.
Stop fetishizing the new.
If it's connecting to the Internet and not getting security updates, that's probably not good.
So what you said is mostly true, but there are certainly people running windows XP thinking "I just check my email and read the news, this is fine"
Meh.
If the other layers of security are in place, the risk can be managed.
The problem you describe is from things like that XP user running as admin, a failure of security layering.
Security isn't just having all the updates, which is the implication statements like this makes.
I have XP VM's with no service packs that connect to the internet. They're NAT'ed in VMware to an isolated subnet that has its own firewall. No MS ports are permitted out of that subnet other than RDP, and that only from specific IP addresses. There's more, but even just this addresses most security concerns.
This is used for testing specific software that only runs on XP.
It’s hilarious that you think someone running XP on the internet knows anything about computer security.
totally.~
If it is connected to the internet, and it is not actively receiving updates, it is not working for its purpose.
If it is airgapped from all networks, I agree with you completely.
Nightmare fuel, at this point. NOTHING but shiny updated firewalls connect to the net themselves.
I have to work with some of these machines. When they fail, it's an ever increasing gamble if we'll even be able to repair them. I already have to resort to buying parts off eBay "as is" and hoping they work. At some point, there's not going to be any left and we'll be utterly fucked.
For me, obsolete often means that I can no longer repair an important tool if it breaks. If I can't get a replacement hard drive or video card or power supply for my ancient Windows computer, I need to think about getting a new computer, just to minimize risk.
I made an actual post about this last week! Old is getting better with how bad new tech is and the privacy and security over reach. You cant even get a new laptop or gaming system without forking over every data point about your life just to log in. Its absolutely stupid.
Unless you use linux that is.
They're all sparkle-junkies, man: newer MUST be better!
It's easier to write "obsolete" than it is "single purpose computer often loaded with technical debt and risk". A computer is meant as a general purpose device. If it can only do one, it's mostly obsolete anyhow
That depends on how many things you NEED it to do. My kitchen knife is not more obsolete than my air fryer just because it does fewer things.
And this is a misuse of the term technical debt. Technical debt does not mean OLD. Finished software from the 80s that was complete and bug free has no technical debt. New software almost UNIVERSALLY has more technical debt than older software because nobody has cleaned up the first draft yet. A continuing, rolling package of spaghetti code, patches, unvetted dependencies, and jammed in features that are sold for subscription fee purposes rather than customer need is OVERFLOWING with it. That's what "move fast and break things" MEANS.
Your kitchen knife is not a computer.
Software is never without bugs. Baffling you'd say otherwise. And I was referring to the many situations where companies used outdated computer systems for many years even though it causes extra work for employees. Absolutely textbook tech debt.
Absolutely disagree on this. There is no fundamental reason software must have bugs. However old systems can be their own technical debt because of things like the hardware no longer being produced and therefore unable to be directly repaired if it breaks from age.
This leaves either reprogramming for a modern device or things like emulation which can create/surface bugs that weren't present before.
The most extreme example I have heard of (sadly couldn't quickly find a link for it) was a disorientation simulator for pilot training that had zero software issues in several decades of use and when the hardware failed they replaced it with an FPGA in a modern system that ran all the old code 1 for 1. PDP stuff originally I think.
Additional edit - I'll add that "bug free" software is insanely rare in reality and nearly but not quite impossible to create in practice. I can't say the software didn't technically have bugs but if multiple decades of use didn't have them show up in practice it is functionally bug free.
You make a fair point.
It's always a risk balance.
Spending effort and money to upgrade a system just so you can say it's new makes no sense.
Physical security systems still use single-pair lines for door switches because it just works. There's no reason to make those things networked just because you can (and companies are trying).
Lol wtf