Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Old Computers



At 12:07 PM 7/26/01 -0400, Michael Edmiston wrote:

(1) Suppose your organization has hundreds of PCs, connected via intranet
and Internet, and lots if document sharing takes place. These can be Word
documents, Excel spreadsheets, databases, whatever. It just doesn't work to
have some people using Office 97 products and others using Office 2000
products. Everyone needs the same version of all the software. We have
site licenses with annual fees to keep all the software current. However,
every time the version upgraded the new version requires faster computers,
more memory, and more hard disk space.

This is called the Microsoft Upgrade Virus. As soon as somebody upgrades,
everybody has to upgrade. This is an outrage. This is the sort of thing
only a vicious monopoly could do, or would do. People expect monopolists
to raise prices. They are surprised when the price of any particular
version seems lower than it could have been. But it's a trick: the real
price is N times higher, because you have to keep buying up grades to the
HW and SW.

In a non-monopolized situation, Linux for example, there is no upgrade
virus. Documents are stored and transmitted in industry-standard
formats. New versions are compatible with old versions.

I'm not disagreeing with ME. He describes the situation as it (mostly)
is. I'm just pointing out that it doesn't have to be that way.

BTW, let me point out that elections have consequences. The new U.S.
administration is not trying nearly as hard as the previous administration
to win the MS antitrust case.

(2) How do you manage to keep everything current without working yourself to
death and/or spending a fortune? We have plan.

Let me point out that hardware monoculture is less important than software
monoculture.

What we are trying to do is change lab computers on "our
schedule" rather than in an emergency

Well, yes, emergencies cause inefficiency -- but needless upgrades cause
inefficiency, too. I recently replaced the 6-year-old desktop computer at
my office, only because it crashed and burned. But all my files were
backed up and a replacement was immediately available. It took a day to
install all my stuff on the new box -- but this would have taken just as
long whether it was scheduled or unscheduled. Replacing the computer every
2 years would have tripled the average amount of work and downtime.

> (3) This means when the college is ready to "throw away" a working computer,
it has been in use for at least 4 years and probably 6 years.... We think the
ones that were continuously-on show more monitor problems and those turned
on-and-off show more hard disk bearing problems (seizing up).

*) That should allow somebody with minimal (!) skills to pair the working
monitors with the working disks.

*) With slightly more skill and a small budget, somebody can replace the
disks with ones that are much larger and faster, and wind up with something
that is pretty nice for 1/10th the cost of an all-new setup.

(4)....
Even those people who agreed with our statement, "Once you take this
computer we don't want to see it again or hear about it again," will come
back to us ....
Believe me, there is no end to this.

Yes, I believe this. Been there. It's even worse than you might think,
because lot of people want computers so they can run the latest games --
even though they won't admit it. The latest games place extreme demands on
the hardware, so the recipients are going to be disappointed if you give
them a superannuated computer.

But as John Clement points out, it should be possible to "launder" the
donation through a third party who protects you from whining recipients.

Also, as Doug Craigen points out, a machine that is unsuitable for personal
computing might make a fine firewall, IPsec gateway, router, print server,
DNS/DHCP/email server, Xterminal, lab-device controller, or whatever. Of
course this requires the recipients to have some clue, but sometimes they
do........

=======================

Bottom line: In some cases you are, and in some cases you are NOT doing
folks a favor by giving them out-of-date computers. It isn't optimal to
make a sweeping always-yes or always-no decision.

Yes, there are problems, but in many cases the problems are solvable.