It may depend on which types of risks are being considered. For example, would you consider it risky to run a stable but unsupported version of Windows on a machine which is connected to the internet, since no new security fixes are being provided for that version?
Jim Mulder z/OS Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp. Poughkeepsie NY > From: David Crayford <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 04/19/2017 12:12 PM > Subject: Re: Old hardware > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> > > You make a very good point that if everything is stable and hasn't been > changed in years then there seems to be little risk. But when at outlier > occurs you're in trouble! > > > On 19/04/2017 11:08 PM, Blaicher, Christopher Y. wrote: > > Back when S&L banks were getting into NOW accounts, what we know > as checking accounts, I was hired to be the manager of systems > programming. They were running unsupported versions of the > operating system, CICS, BTAM and everything else. They had a 99.9% > up-time and every one slept well, all because nothing had changed in YEARS. > > Then they had to bring in new software to do check processing and > it needed current versions of the software and go to VTAM. > > Making all those changes, and not having another machine to do it > on, was a challenge. There were bumps in the road, but we stayed at > over 95% uptime and clawed our way back to over 99%. > > Management slept well, I didn't for about 3 months. Oh, and then > they decided to move the data center. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
