This month, Uncle Geoff wonders if computer tech isn’t built with a pre-determined turn-off date. A fate far more dangerous than any Science Fiction scenario.

Hello everyone

For those who read my editorials in their entirety, are probably wondering what sliced bread has to do with Science Fiction? Equally, those who are becoming conversant with my writing are aware that I always draw something significant from a tangent. Thinking editorial does that after a while. This time, I’ll get the reason for the above line explained early.

Everyone marvelled when it was possible to have sliced bread instead of having to assault the loaf of bread itself with a bread knife. It was perceived as both labour-saving and an aid to people whose artistry with cutting regular-sized slices of bread something they could never master.

Probably why bread rolls became popular as they only needed one cut. It didn’t take over from uncut bread largely cos a lot of people could still cut a decent slice of bread not to mention having a preference for bread made in less than regular shapes. It just made sliced bread a convenience food. Both sorts of people were catered for and the world looked happy.

It’s also an odd state of affairs these days that any visit to a baker’s shop for bread is they ask if they can slice it for you. It’s also said in the same way as ‘How are you?’ and ‘How do you do?’ Questions that don’t really need a proper answer because no one really pays attention either way to the response unless it applies to them.

Maybe I’m too literal, cos in my own interminable way, I looked at what slicing a loaf would mean and ended up replying, ‘It dries the loaf out faster that way.’ Which indeed it does cos of the greater surface area. Our garden birds get enough bread without me saturating the garden.

As you can guess, I prefer to cut my own bread. I’m probably going to vary the response that sliced loaves aren’t particularly clever in going into small freezers either although I’m sure you people out there probably do that all the time. What it boils down to is nothing comes without its own pitfalls.

It’s a matter of taking on board a new innovation and either using it in total or part or ignoring it altogether if its function isn’t quite what is required. In many respects, I don’t believe sliced bread to be as innovative as the slogan suggests. It’s just a way around a problem for people who can’t handle a bread knife.

Not all things can be compared to sliced bread. Take the technology that you’re using to read this editorial for instance. It’s estimated that there is a new computer technological breakthrough or advance every eighteen months or less. As such, manufacturers are eager to get their research money and profits back by introducing to the market as fast as possible.

It also makes consumers’ eyes spin with all that is available versus do I really need it for my computer? It becomes a question of minor or major upgrade. With everything on an upward spiral, if you don’t upgrade now then it’s a sure bet that you’ll have to within a couple year period simply cos your computer specification can’t cope with some new nifty installation or software. The decision really depends on when and there’s always another innovation around the corner.

The last bit sounds rather odd, at least for existing software, cos on CD there will always be space to put drivers on for all operating systems and making the system flexible. I’ve also heard companies say that this means additional cost and won’t back back-support mandatory. Pity such an affair doesn’t follow the same route as with computer printer supplies as these manufacturers are obliged to ensure ribbons or ink cartridges are available.

Forcing a use of some software with the latest operating system or hardware is really taking too many decisions away from the consumer and possibly damaging overall sales. Yes, I can appreciate that with some games, you’re going to need a faster videocard to get the full effect but playing the game in a lower class colour option should also be considered.

If the game looks playable, the consumer can at least make up their own minds as to whether they have a new videocard to get more out of it. Sometimes I wonder if the software companies have shares in the videocard companies!

With totally reliable computer technology, it would be like the cobbler who made shoes that never wore out and went out of business cos no one wanted anything new. Even that’s a rather old story and probably not telling the complete truth. All it would take is a fashion innovation and a different style of shoes would be needed.

The cobbler would always be in work. In such a perfect world, there is little thought given to the fact that many customers would like more than one pair of shoes. Men might be happy that way but I doubt if women would be. A demonstration that such fables don’t always have much bearing on ‘true’ reality and more an act of scaremongering..

People will update their computers if they deem it useful to their purposes than if it's necessary. It was mentioned in the press last year that computer sales have gone into recline. Fewer people are buying new computers because their old ones are doing fine. A few milliseconds faster is hardly considered revolutionary in computer design.

The fastest computer still loads files from a floppy or CD at the same speed as the slower computers. Some bottlenecks are just limitation indicators. The next major change will be from silicon to protein technology. Even then, this will make little difference to the man or woman in the street cos the running speeds will be pretty much the same. If anything, I suspect silicon and protein based computers will co-exist in pretty much the same way as video tape and DVD will assuming manufacturers don’t force the issue as reflected in the high street shops lately.

Such problems must be an enormous bugbear to any computer parts manufacturer who have to show a profit for their shareholders. Take our current level of technology. In short order in the past month, I’ve had hardware failures with one of my printers and the mouse. The latter shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.

Rolling a mouse around on its mat and other such abuse is likely to rattle some damage at some point and cause it to break. An inkjet printer failure was odd though. My dot matrix printer is still going strong after nearly a decade and yet something relatively new - 3 years old - just gives up the ghost with no real warning.

A comment from a shop salesmen when getting a replacement printer that ‘modern technology has a redundancy breakdown factor incorporated into it’ seemed an odd thing to admit.

In other words, he thinks that after a period of time, anything with a chip in it is doomed to break down. It would be the equivalent of the cobbler ensuring that all the nails in your shoes fell out after so many years.

Not sure if I believe that 100% or we’d all be rushing to the shops every couple years to get replacement computers as they fail. Then again, we do that anyway but usually cos we need something a little faster or with bigger capacity. We probably change somethings before a potential crash without realising it.

It’s bad enough that we’re often forced to consider computer upgrades to keep up with better graphics, etc simply cos our old computers can’t pass as much muster as they once did. No doubt such thoughts from the companies is what keeps them in business beyond ensuring everyone in the civilised world has got a computer.

If anything, it’s more an indictment that we like to see things change than maintain the status quo, even if we all fight against change in some form or another at some point in our lives.

What does concern me is this idea of hardware technology being designed to break down after a limited period. That even harkens back to the Replicants in the old ‘Blade Runner’ film. It’s not difficult to do after all. We’ve all sampled software with a month’s deadline before turning off. Considering how much computer tech is used in our society in some places, like medical or transport, such actions could be classed as culpably dangerous.

A malfunction in a computer system on a space flight or on the space station would have dire consequences for its crew. You wouldn’t have to have a malfunctioning computer like the HAL 9000 ignoring its primary orders. You’d just need an expiry date to pass and someone forgot to make certain systems exempt for everything to shut down. Everyone tends to look in the wrong places for failure than the simplest places to start.

I’m hoping such a scenario isn’t true or that any manufacturer considering such an option reconsiders. Having the most basic hardware capable of lasting up to genuine mechanical failure should be something we would all like to have.

With less truly moving parts, a silicon processor after its initial 6 month run-in, should be lasting an infinite length of time as well. If it turns off through either a message through the Internet or a time-based signal then I think we all have reason to be alarmed at the prospect.

Where computer tech is concerned, we’re already living within one Science Fiction dream. It should not become a nightmare through any company’s greed or desire for us to upgrade beyond the time we’re ready to do so. That decision really should be left in the hands of the consumer to make the final decision than be forced on them.

Thank you and good night.

Geoff Willmetts
editor: SFCrowsnest.com

Several Post Scripts:-

1. So neither I nor my boss wish to be sued over the above editorial, please note I mention no names nor have any positive proof. It is just a concern over a very dangerous scenario that can or could easily be carried out.

2. I’m really re-organising my schedule to get my book samples backlog sorted out. If you have moved your book elsewhere, then tell me and let me take it out of my pile for those with more patience.

3. Finally, something to consider: As Tolkien’s trilogy is called ‘Lord Of The Rings’, why is Frodo short-changed with only one ring?

SFCrowsnest e-mail: gfwillmetts@REMOVE.FOR.SPAMhotmail.com
terrestrial address:
74 Gloucester Road,
BRIDGWATER, Somerset TA6 6EA, UK.
SAEs (International Rates: include at least 2 IRCs or enough to cover return of manuscripts if sending in material) will always get replies.

About the H&T (handsome and talented) Geoff Willmetts