You have probably heard the saying “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it” more times than you can count. While the meaning behind this statement has a good foundation, I don’t really think it applies as a whole to computers.
For a simple example, look at IE6. While this browser has a fair market share (mainly because of corporate policies and lazy users), nobody in their right mind would tell you it is better than its successors. That said, it still works on just about site you encounter. So to not upgrade your browser because IE6 “isn’t broken” is a dangerous decision because it has so many security issues.
Now take a look at Windows XP. This OS is 10 years old which means its design was for technology which is, relative to technology, long obsolete. Yes it still works/”isn’t broken”, but it is quickly becoming the IE6 of the Windows OS. Ed Bott did a write-up recently on this topic where he points out how many critical security patches are released for XP vs. Windows 7.
All I am saying here is technologies have a life span and XP has reached its end. Choosing not to upgrade (and advising others to do the same) for the sole reason that it “isn’t broken” is not a wise decision.
Do you agree with me here?
Like what you read?
If so, please join over 28,000 people who receive our exclusive weekly newsletter and computer tips, and get FREE COPIES of 5 eBooks we created, as our gift to you for subscribing. Just enter your name and email below:
Hello Jason,
I agree about XP, hate to admit it but yes it is almost time to put it to rest.
Like a great pair of old shoes or an antique car you have to either put them in the trash or put the car in the garage with a cover over.
Still gonna miss it when I do my upgrade… [Sigh!]
I disagree with this, but mostly because I think you’re using the phrase improperly.
I work in Microcomputer Support IT. And after 3 years in this job I’ve found that often the best thing to do when dealing with a troublesome computer is to fix the thing that’s broken and ONLY that thing. Many many times I will get a simple call about a PC (e.g. no sound), and arrive to discover the speakers are unplugged. However in the course of troubleshooting I’ll find tons of toolbars, misconfigured and outdated software, etc. Speaking purely from statistical experience, attempting to fix anything above and beyond what I got called about results in more return-trips than leaving these things be.
That said, I do believe we’re talking about two very different things here. Your article says you don’t believe this adage applies to computers. I’m saying that’s too wide a category to which to apply it. In your example you are applying it to software, primarily from a developer’s side, not to computers as a whole. I still may not entirely agree with you, but I would say that your stance is a little fallacious, as I would argue that IE6 (to stick with the example) _is_ broken. In software, the mere existence of bugs and exploits fits the definition of “broken” in my opinion. However that still doesn’t mean that software applies in all circumstances.
If a certain software systems (for example, take some simple, oldies but goodies that hardly every get updated, such as PuTTY, or X, or even protocols, such as SSH2, or DNS even) are bug-free and do everything you need them to do, there truly _is_ no reason to fix them. And any significant bugs or exploits should be fixed. Either way they apply to the adage. And it’s no different when you’re talking about big projects, like browsers or OSes. Bugs still need fixing, and what’s not broken need not be touched, unless you’re adding new features.
As applied to other things as well, “If it ain’t broke then don’t fix it” assumes that preventative maintenance is never required. If this philosophy was adapted to the aviation industry, planes would be falling out of the sky every time a part wore out.
Cars would never be getting oil changes nor would timing belts be getting changed before they snapped.
We would never be going in to the doctor for checkups.
I can name all kinds of things.
Its a dangerous philosophy to adopt if applied to the wrong things.
Agreed, Jason. XP is now obsolete, and it is long gone from my workhorse 2004 HP laptop that still runs OK, but with Linux now. I still keep XP installation disks, though, for should I somehow acquire a third, fairly simple computer, I might run it as a legacy, strictly offline system just for the sake of some useful software that would only run on XP (HP Image Zone, MS Picture It! Photo, Encarta, etc.).
Jason,
For once, Jason, I think that I need to disagree with you. But my main disagreement would be with your implied definition of “broke.” Although installations of ie6 work, the fact that it has so many security problems, I would considerate it broken.
On the other hand, the computers that are running winXP are generally older and probably wouldn’t support Vista or win7 without major upgrades and as long as XP is supported by MS, XP ‘not broken’ and is appropiate for these machines. Now, when the time comes that MS no longer supports XP, it’s definitely time to upgrade, because any new security holes would essentially “break” the system.
Just my 2¢.
Bob
I think you are taking the phrase to literally. Jason’s use was perfectly acceptable. The term “fix” in the idiom doesn’t necessarily mean repair. Like DavidM eluded to it can mean to improve upon as well and I think this is the more typical usage. Even if the term fix was used literally you first paragraph wouldn’t apply to the phrase because you only attempted to fix something not actually fix it.
The software and protocols you mentioned have all been updated and there is no reason why that needs or will to stop.
PuTTY was update 3 years ago for bug fixes certainly could use a GUI update at least.
SSH2 was an update to SSH which which had security issues. No reason that SSH2 will eventually have similar issues.
DNS – If you look at all of the associated RFCs you’ll understand why that’s even not a good example.
I agree that there are a few security flaws in XP and some of the patches and up grades don’t even install! But it is still the best operating system by far, that Mister Gates has come up with and I and many others are not to sure about Windows 7 being what it is claimed to be. As far as people are concerned I was just in the Philippines and over there those who can afford it are using windows 7 mostly the gamers, the prices for mother boards, processors memory hard drives are comprable to that which we pay here in American $$’s at the big computer parts companies. My nieces computer was running Windows 95 when I was visiting there the other computer was running xp and so was the 8 month old lap top.
I have worked on ships own by the U.S. Goverment and some of the workstation were running NT4 oh yes it is true and that was 2 months ago.
The big question is; do the computer manufactures really think the world is going to buy new computers with I series processors that cannot run XP as they are trying to force on us now mainly in laptops. Are those like myself who have learned how to repair, and build our own computers going to give up what works.
Or are we going to forget that Microsoft is in the business of making and selling Operating Systems and just use Ubuntu.
Thank you.
I used this adage and compared computers to cars recently. A ’79 pickup isn’t broken, why fix it? Well you can drive it if you want, but my new car has comforts like AC, and safety features like airbags. Anyone that wants to keep using the old, fine, but advising others to do the same is misleading and occasionally dangerous.
I need to re-install Windows 98 in order to use Compton’s Learning software that I bought and never used. So, a dual-boot with XP is possible, but with Vista or 7 is not. Since I have 2 computers, I can run several OSs on them, so upgrading both is not desireable now.
For once, Jason, I think that I need to disagree with you. But my main disagreement would be with your implied definition of “broke.” Although installations of ie6 work, the fact that it has so many security problems, I would considerate it broken.