Comment by mschuster91
10 hours ago
> It is nonetheless relevant, especially in the presence of escape mechanisms to oppressive governments, and digital sovereignty.
Not just for that. There's an awful, awful lot of ancient embedded hardware running machinery sometimes worth dozens of millions of dollars, and it's running even more ancient software. Siemens, for example, recently searched for people capable of (and willing to) working with Windows 3.11 [1], presumably to deal with the HMI displays for locomotive/train drivers.
When dealing with hardware or software that has lifecycles measured in half-centuries, bridges to allow modern tooling to work with it are really, really important.
[1] https://www.heise.de/news/Deutsche-Bahn-sucht-Admin-fuer-Win...
Working with Windows 3.11 isn't even the problem there though, that is only a symptom. You could get one of the original authors of 3.11 in there and all they would get told by Siemens would be "no, you can't touch anything. You can't change anything, you can't install a new piece of software, even one designed for Windows 3.11. You can't fix this obvious bug, even if you are Chesteron. The absolute only thing we will allow you to do is to salve the very shallowest possible symptom that we never noticed until this week, and you can only do that by adding a new thing completely outside of the scope of everything that already exists and make the ball of pain larger."
There are millions of Windows 95 embedded in industrial or government machines. Millions.
Doing stuff that an ESP 32 would suffice.
There are at least 8 layers of bureaucracy between the ones who need it, and the ones who make it.
Yeah but instead of rewriting it, dropping in a supported OS that continues to receive security fixes is a very attractive alternative.