🚀 go-pugleaf

Alan Morgan wrote:
> 
> In article <Pine.LNX.3.96.980929174327.11647A-100000@welpc040.domgen.com>,
> Jason Clifford  <jason@ukpost.com> wrote:
> 
> >Why do you assume that all software has a 'fairly short useful lifespan'.
> >Just because a package is superceded it is not redered useless. There are
> >many people who are still running WordPerfect 5.0 as their word processor
> >becuase it does everything they need.
> >
> >I even have an old copy (about 9 years) of a C compiler for DOS that would
> >be very useful to me if I ever decided I wanted to compile something for
> >DOS.
> >
> >Old or superceded does not equate to useless.
> 
> No, but the lifespan of software is still pretty short when compared with
> the lifespan of a book, piece of music, or painting.  A book that was written
> 50 years ago is still perfectly readable and useful today.  Paintings can
> be hundreds of years old and still be appreciated as much today as they were
> when they were painted.  I'd be willing to bet that in 50 years you won't
> be able to run Windows 98 on any computer than doesn't come from the collection
> of some computer archivist.

Just a thought. Is anyone archiving old pc software?
> 
> Alan

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------
It is impossible to foresee the consequences of being clever.
{Christopher Strachey}
-------------------------------------------------------------