Monday, 8 October 2007

Newer/faster/bigger is not always better

How long should companies support yesterday's products and what happens when support is removed?

You expect at least ten years support from a car manufacturer and (really) depend on twenty from an aircraft company, but what about less expensive purchases?


Take software; not everyone wants the latest software, nor will all hardware support it but what if the PC/Console game you love depends on servers provided by its creators?

EA Sports have been switching off servers supporting 49 last-generation games, some of which were only brought out in 2006.

A smart move? Not from what I have read on gaming blogs or seen in the gaming press.
Newer/faster/bigger is not always better, nor is it always affordable.

I am pleased to see that, following a luke-warm reception for Vista from business users, Microsoft seems to have listened; extending the lifespan of XP.

This make sense; No-one has a wish to go back to windows 2000 (make a cup of tea and some scones while it boots-up) but XP is now a stable business tool.



So will there be a day when something in the digital domain becomes a classic and worthy of protection/preservation?

Maybe; it's surely not going to be Tiger Woods PGA Tour 06 for Xbox either but companies such as EA would do well to remember that those that cannot afford to play the 'faster hardware/ bigger software/ faster hardware 18-month redundancy game' are advocates and detractors too.

No comments: