Re: How long will 8.1.7 survive?

Wed, 18 Sep 2002 08:55:39 -0400, Fred Pierce said (and I quote):

>
> As you described though, in most cases it's better to keep up than to
> have to make a giant leap from having waited for too many versions. I
> just start planning for the next version as soon as the present one is
> installed. Nevertheless I wonder sometimes whatever happened to "if it
> ain't broke, don't fix it."
>

Not much. Still alive. The problem is not this. The problem is that 9 times out of ten these so-called "static" applications and databases end up being the base for the next iteration of the software or the next addon  feature. There is no such thing as a forever static system.

Odds-on that this new application software or add-on functionality could well work much better if it used the new features of 8i or 9i. Yet the site being in 7.3 will perpetuate a bad use of technology simply because of the "ain't broke" thing. Fact is: it *IS* broke. It needs upgrading.

The longer this situation is left by itself, the harder it will be to upgrade. For example: if you want to migrate from 7.3 to 9i, you *must* first convert to 8. That is already a two-step process.

And it will only get worse. Obviously, the end result is: the "enterprise" decides "it's all too hard, let's sell-off to M$ and be done with it". And we now have the perpetuation of idiocy added to the perpetuation of a bad habit.

Because there is no way in the world M$ or any other software maker (including Oracle and IBM) will change their way of distributing software and patches through new versions. It's been going on for too long and it would cost us all a bundle to change. The time to make a stand about this was 10 years ago when M$ started the practice. Back then every1 thought it was "groovy" and "kewl". Now it's too late.

> P.S. Oh yeah - I'm driving an '88 car. Just can't think of a reason to
> upgrade.
>

Hehehe! I wish I still had my 1984 car...

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam