Why don't System designs include end of life migrations?

This topic was created by OzBob .

Why don't System designs include end of life migrations?

Am stuck building an obscure Non-Linux OS to house an Application written in an archiac language, and it struck me that designs for solutions do not identify the end of life process or ease of migration from them.

Shouldn't most Systems have a method of automated extraction of data in a common format for migration, or the ability to port code easily? It seems a waste of my time to build an out-of-date OS just to host an Application that could be easily written in something else. or is it the fact that it's my time being wasted, rather than the developers?

0
0

Re: Why don't System designs include end of life migrations?

The latter part is more true. I don't know much about development so I am not going to comment on it. But I am sure your time is being wasted mate :D

1
0
Unhappy

It's called Vendor Lock-in. Basically means once you rely on their software, you either:

a. Suck it up and pay them Extortion, er, I mean Maintenance & Support for the rest of your life

b. Pay them a shed load of money to be able to extract YOUR data in a transferable format

c. Not sure I can think of a c TBH

And when they can't even be bothered to follow their own "standards" so later versions of their own software have issues reading data from an old version, you are stuck in the situation you are now.

1
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017