Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

circuitbored.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#71

Post by celticmusic »

safety-third wrote: post #63
nicolaslem wrote: post #12

As time passes the more I think that Stallman was right: Today there is no way I'm buying a device that a company can turn into a paperweight by flipping a switch. Tomorrow I won't probably buy anything where I'm not controlling the software.

Sony literally bricked my PS1&2 compatible PS3 with an update and offered me something like a $20 gift certificate for Sony products for my troubles. I haven't bought anything Sony since. The real issue is that courts hesitate to turn the screws on the companies that get caught doing this. If Sony was forced to pay 5x original cost in penalties, the cost-benefit analysis wouldn't have been in their favor. I am today…

> Sony literally bricked my PS1&2 compatible PS3 with an update and offered me something like a $20 gift certificate for Sony products for my troubles. I haven't bought anything Sony since

I'd be extremely angry over that.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#72

Post by mamborambo »

The "Buy it for life" movement would absolutely need to flag software-dependency as an anti-feature. My recent smart TV purchase is regrettably tied to a fixed China-hosted domain name to fetch the main pages, and despite many calls to the manufacturer they refuse to tell me how to change that hard-wired address to another one. I hope the consumers can rally together and create a crowdsourced BIFL database of which brands to avoid, and perhaps how to circumvent these software dependency.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#73

Post by tluyben2 »

winternett wrote: post #64
tluyben2 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard drives 5 years; yeah it happens but then usually fast after active use: if they do not fail fast then they usually keep going. I have 100s of HD's here from 25 to a few years ago and most of them work fine. Especially the 90s/00s then-expensive scsi discs do not seem to fail. But cheap internal and external HD's from that time are also still all working. If they get beyond 5 years (and by far most do), they get…

Don't worry, all the other peripherals will lose driver support, and your processor will crack long before 5 years anyway... Hah.

New stuff will; (unix) workstations and servers from 20-25 years ago are running fine inc all hds.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#74

Post by beardyw »

viklove wrote: post #28
alkaline9 wrote: post #3

Perishable software is a huge problem - things keep operating only in dynamic equilibrium, such that they would fall apart as soon as we stop putting energy into fixing flaws. I have been thinking for years that as a society, we need 100-year products. It would be a global good to counteract the local incentives for producing perishable software. However, over time I have realized that there are legitimately unforese…

> such that they would fall apart as soon as we stop putting energy into fixing flaws This is not true. The only reason software needs constant updates is because new features are constantly being added to stay competitive. If you stop adding features, in theory you will eventually run out of bugs to fix as well. The problem is feature creep. Software doesn't "decay," and thus does not need infinite maintenance.

I have, since January, a "frozen" Windows 7 environment with WiFi/LAN switched off. I use it rarely, now on Ubuntu, but there is something about it that feels good where it didn't before. I think it is just it's feeling of permanence.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#76

Post by ThePowerOfFuet »

leoedin wrote: post #15
anyonecancode wrote: post #7

Maybe a better analogy isn't milk, but car seats? I was surprised to learn about car seat expiration when I became a parent, but it makes sense -- the materials themselves break down over time, and safety standards and research evolve. I don't think it's too big of a leap to see software in a similar way. Even if the code itself still runs just fine in ten years, likely the context it runs in has long changed.

The car seat thing is actually mostly unfounded. There's a lot of social panic about child safety. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketplace.org/2019/11/14/...

Can you please try not to post AMP links to HN?

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#77

Post by dragonwriter »

anyonecancode wrote: post #7

Maybe a better analogy isn't milk, but car seats? I was surprised to learn about car seat expiration when I became a parent, but it makes sense -- the materials themselves break down over time, and safety standards and research evolve. I don't think it's too big of a leap to see software in a similar way. Even if the code itself still runs just fine in ten years, likely the context it runs in has long changed.

> Maybe a better analogy isn't milk, but car seats? I

That's a good analogy: software, like car seats, generally doesn't go bad with time, but the people that sold it would definitely like to sell you new software.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#78

Post by phendrenad2 »

mamborambo wrote: post #72

The "Buy it for life" movement would absolutely need to flag software-dependency as an anti-feature. My recent smart TV purchase is regrettably tied to a fixed China-hosted domain name to fetch the main pages, and despite many calls to the manufacturer they refuse to tell me how to change that hard-wired address to another one. I hope the consumers can rally together and create a crowdsourced BIFL database of which b…

You could do it at the router level.

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#79

Post by taeric »

taeric wrote: post #66
oneplane wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which TeX? Over the last 10 years, over 20 serious and critical vulnerabilities have been found in various TeX implementations. They were all fixed via... maintenance.

How many of those were extensions? Pdftex, as an example, is not TeX. There have been roughly, what, eight releases in TeX since version 3? Hence we are now at 3.14159265. This is not to say things couldn't have been done better. But I love that all of my documents still compile just fine. Modern practices? Nope.

Coming back to this after a few days. I also can't help but take a double take at 20 vulnerabilities in 10 years being a serious criticism. Is the implicit claim that this is a bad record compared to other software legit? (Honest question.)

Re: Software-dependent devices: do they now need expiration dates?

#80

Post by anon73044 »

user5994461 wrote: post #51
anon73044 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, Windows XP and IE 5 still have a nonzero market share for some reason.

Windows XP and Vista have a market share of less than 0.1% if we are to believe steam stats. https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/ Either that, or steam doesn't work on these and the missing 0.1% are Windows Server OS. Turns out, software does stop working for real.

Steam doesn't count the 3.2 million ATMs worldwide and still far too many running XP.
Post reply on HN