Re: Should legacy technologies be allowed to remain forever? [Telecom]

On Jun 23, 10:10 pm, David Clayton <dcs...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Having read the recent posts about people being cut off copper for fiber,
and also being compelled to switch to Digital TV, it occurs to me that the
underlying question should be is it really fair to retain - essentially
ancient - technologies?

In any discussion like this we first must get out facts straight.
These days, it includes separating out technology from policy, and
marketing issues.

We certainly don't know for sure if people were actually cut off from
copper for fiber (I know I wasn't, and they seem in no rush to get me
on fibre even if I wanted it). Likewise, we don't know if people were
_compelled_ to switch to digital TV. (I do know someone who was
falsely induced to switch to digital by a cable tech, though his bill
remains the same. Of course, my own observations are quite limited.
Just because a few techs or sales people are scumbags does not mean
everyone is.)

The second issue is that _any_ change in technology costs money. The
new equipment must be purchased, installed, and employees and
customers trained on it. There is a shakedown period. Capial itelf
has a cost (interest or dividends) and capital is not unlimited--we
must choose our purchases. Obviously the new technology must bring
about enough cost savings and new featurse to truly justify its own
cost. Too often marketing or techie types push new technologies
before they're truly ready or exaagerate their benefits.

Companies have been ruined by bad technological implementations.



Perhaps we should evaluate the ongoing costs/benefits of retaining or
replacing these technologies, as it seems that the costs may well be
outweighing the benefits now and in the future.

This isn't a "perhaps", but rather an "absolute must in all cases".



I can see good arguments myself for both sides, but in reality a lot of
these things are a bit like allowing "horse and buggy" vehicles onto a
freeway and then requiring the freeway to accommodate them safely by
providing legacy infrastructure (maybe a special lane just for them) or
slowing everyone else down to their maximum capability - possible (and
good for the horse and buggy user) but really tying up resources that
newer technologies can use more efficiently.

An extremely tiny minority of vehicles these days are horse and
buggy. They wouldn't use a freeway, but old country roads. Indeed, a
freeway is to their advantage as it takes cars off old roads.

For our disucssion purposes, let's say old cars that max out at 50 mph
and that many people still have them.

A freeway is built by public funds and open to the public. As such,
it must accomodate all or most of the public, not just a select few.
If many drivers are using old cars then the freeway must accmoodate
them. Indeed, that is the case today, not so much old cars but some
drivers who aren't comfortable going too fast. (On the roads
newsgroup, many there have no use for slow drivers; they expect
everyone to go 75 or more.)

In our situation, we must ask WHY so many people have old cars. It
may very well be the cost of upgrade. They cars may run perfectly
well for their purposes and they see no point in conversion.

(This just happened to me. I was very happy using film, but film and
developing got harder to get. I finally broke down and bought a $$$
digital camera. I just heard Kodachrome, the 'gold standard' of
films, is being discontinued. So it goes.)

I should point out that IBM, when introducing newer computer models,
always made sure there was an easy transition path from earlier
models. Old programs could be run on the new machine without change,
despite a big difference in internal architecture. That was a major
selling point.


Telecom seems to be an area where the cost of retaining legacy
infrastructure may well be increasing the costs of better infrastructure
right now and/or slowing down the future deployment of even better
infrastructure.

Actually, exactly where and what is the "cost of retaining legacy
infrastructure"? The telcos can't upgrade the entire plant overnight.


I also want to point out that while some old technologies do totally
fade away, others just take a smaller role. It took the Bell System
years to get rid of operators--in the 1970s automated world they had
_more_ than they did in manual days because traffic was so high!
(There are still some today.) Many people still use Dixon Ticoneroga
No. 2 pencils. Some audiophiles swear by vinyl records and vaccum
tube amps. Streetcards, powered by 600 volt DC motors, still play
their way in some cities. Some trains use 11,000 V 25 Hz current
which is ancient (as are the substations). Heck, this ASCII
conversation and dial-up protocol dates from 1962.

.

Loading