{"id":206,"date":"2011-09-27T14:09:47","date_gmt":"2011-09-27T19:09:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.rymocs.com\/blog3\/?p=206"},"modified":"2011-09-27T14:09:47","modified_gmt":"2011-09-27T19:09:47","slug":"web-master-challenges-staying-ahead-of-obsolescence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.rymocs.com\/blog3\/2011\/09\/27\/web-master-challenges-staying-ahead-of-obsolescence\/","title":{"rendered":"Web master challenges: Staying ahead of obsolescence"},"content":{"rendered":"

Comparing technology, advancements, and costs for equipment from the early 1990s to today, you get a sense of how everything including skills and proficiency can become obsolete in a short time \u2014 three to five years, actually. Most of us know Moore\u2019s Law<\/a>, which simply states that the number of transistors placed within integrated circuits doubles every two years. Moore\u2019s Law continues to be a fairly accurate target from the time Gordon E. Moore, co-founder of Intel, first described the trend in a report in 1965. Major enabling factors and trends, which continue to support the law are shown in current technological growth; examples include advancements in microchips, semiconductors, and the development of a single-electron transistor 1.5 nanometers in diameter made out of oxide-based materials. Some speculate that a new form of technology will likely replace current integrated circuit technology, and that Moore\u2019s Law will hold true well beyond 2020.<\/p>\n

A trip down memory lane<\/h2>\n

In 1991, I had to decide on a new home computer acquisition. I juggled comparisons between PC and Apple, and after much deliberation, it came down to budget considerations as the motivating factor in my final decision. The PC won out in the ultimate assessment, but it was not an IBM PC. I settled on a clone, or an IBM-compatible Hyundai 386 SX with a 40MB hard drive, which included a fancy \u201cturbo\u201d 16MHz button. In the September 10, 1990 issue of InfoWorld<\/em>, a large advertisement on page 38 promoted it like this: \u201cThe Hyundai\u00ae<\/sup> 386 Series personal computers have the power to make light work of the heaviest problems.\u201d<\/p>\n

When I bought the Hyundai 386 in the summer of 91, it was not the top of the line; the 486 had just hit the market, and the cream of the crop carried a top price, too. I think I paid around $2,100 for the complete Hyundai 386 package, which included the color 14\u2033 VGA monitor, keyboard, and mouse; the 486 clones were priced at around $3,400 at the time; and the IBM PCs were in the $3-4K range in the early 1990s.<\/p>\n

Just for kicks, and since Steve Jobs has just announced his stepping down as CEO of Apple, I wanted to look up how much an Apple Mac was selling for in 1990, and on page 5 under \u201cNews\u201d items for the same issue of InfoWorld<\/em>, Kristi Coale reported that the base configuration for the Apple Macintosh IIci model with 4 megabytes of RAM and a floppy drive listed for $5,969, and that the top configuration model of 4 megabytes of RAM and an 80-megabyte hard drive was $7,269.<\/p>\n

Keeping up with the pace<\/h2>\n

The desktop PC\u2019s from the early 1990\u2019s were built rock solid, with heavy sheet metal cases and a lot less plastic on the inside compared to today\u2019s models. Is this an example of planned obsolescence, which seems to be the standard in some of today\u2019s technology? Just take a look at cell phones and and laptops \u2014 lots of plastic, flimsy parts and easy-to-break pieces. I can\u2019t tell you how many laptop display screens and keyboards I have had to order replacements for over the past ten years, and this is from normal daily use.<\/p>\n

As a web master or technology manager, how do you know that the current technology, hardware, software, and human resources you have in use today will be able to keep up with the ever-changing landscape? \u00a0You can\u2019t upgrade all your servers and clients to the next operating system every time a new version hits the shelves; it becomes too expensive to make the switch every three to five years. Several companies, including one that I contract with, continue to support client PCs with Windows XP, however, there is a small rollout of newer Windows 7 computers coming down the line.<\/p>\n

When it comes to thousands of licensing and software upgrades that need to be purchased, and then the cost of getting your rollout team to make the transition \u2014 and in most cases this comes with a hardware upgrade to coincide with the new OS \u2014 the costs start adding up. How can you justify a new hardware and software rollout every three to five years? \u00a0Justification for upgrades must come with hard documentation for increases in productivity for the company. And then, you have to make sure you picked the right horse; you don\u2019t want to go with a technology solution that ends up losing the race five or ten years down the road.<\/p>\n

Striking a balance between the two factions can be a good approach to handling the obsolescence pattern, but is that enough to keep abreast of the rapidly changing environment? At what level of the innovation adoption lifecycle do you choose to live? Your answer probably depends on the technology and the characteristics of that technology utilized within your organization, the team employed to carry out the work, and the budget that limits your spending dollar.<\/p>\n

Meeting the challenge<\/h2>\n

The challenges today are finding ways of increasing the industrious life cycles of systems, software, and equipment, and ensuring that the talent is keeping up their own skills as it relates to the latest trends in technology and design.<\/p>\n

Increasing the productive life of assets means extracting every last dollar of computing power until it has to be replaced with new components, which could mean hard drives, SCSI boards, NIC cards, monitors, servers, operating systems, firewalls, and software.<\/p>\n

Here are a few ways to improve your effectiveness:<\/p>\n