The most durable tech is boring, old, and everywhere

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨cm0002@no.lastname.nz⁩ to ⁨retrocomputing@lemmy.sdf.org⁩

https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/31/long_lived_tech/

COBOL turned 66 this year and is still in use today. Major retail and commercial banks continue to run core account processing, ATM networks, credit card clearing, and batch end-of-day settlement. On top of that, many payment networks, stock exchanges, and clearinghouses rely on COBOL for high‑volume, high‑reliability batch and online transaction processing on mainframes.

Which reminds me, mainframes are still alive and well too. Banking, insurance, governments, inventory management – all the same places you’ll find COBOL, you’ll find mainframes as well.

None of that is as sexy as the latest AI program or the newest cloud-native computing release, but old dogs with their old tricks still have useful work to perform.

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

dan@upvote.au ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Rewriting existing systems is one of the riskiest things a company can do. Those old COBOL codebases likely contain 50 years of bug fixes for every possible edge case. It’d take a long time to rewrite everything and ensure feature parity, and there’s usually not a significant business reason to rewrite it (after all, a successful end result is just that the system behaves exactly the same as the old one).

source
Shirasho@lemmings.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
This is one of the reasons COBOL programmers get paid extremely well. Nobody is learning it anymore and these people are critical if an issue occurs.

source
- CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  Do they though…? I’m not sure they do.
  
  source
  - bytesonbike@discuss.online ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    This rumor persists for so long. I’ve been in tech for now twenty years, and juniors say this all the time. Also, I’m hired to replace archaic code with modern equivalents, so my perspective is one from the other side.
    
    A few key things I discovered:
    
    Companies that need devs of an archaic language are extremely rare. I’m talking about like you won’t see it on job boards until they already have 1-2 people in mind already.
    
    Usually the people they hire have been doing only that for years. Usually retired computer scientists or professors.
    
    The pay isn’t high at all. I remember seeing a position that needed THIRTY years, and their offer was nice, but low on the tech side. I made double the salary. If you work at META or Alphabet, you’ll be making 4-6 times as much.
    
    Finally, those archaic systems get forced into retirement. Yes, there are still integrated systems like ATM and missiles or whatever that use these languages.
    
    But that’s so extremely rare that they’re still being maintained. Because companies will allocate a budget to have some dipshit programmer like me come in, rewrite the functionality in whatever language (the last one I did was a interface from a PoS system to a web application, which I did in PHP), and then throw away the code.
    
    source
menas@lemmy.wtf ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
You point is right, but the example is not correct. All languages such as C/C++ are reliable, and way more efficient with ressources. The environment to make simple software such as we browser or text editor are incredibly big. Firefox on a random front page took 300M ram. Same web browser and text editors used to run on 64Mb ram. Same need, a lot more efficiency

However, in tech we are used to be blind to the work needed to carry one one technology. Banks have dedicated firms to keep COBOL running and update it with everything that was missing back in time. Techbros make shit, true. But there is no magical technologies, only workers

source
Tim_Bisley@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
DOGE tech bros HATE this one thing…

source
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Linux is glamorous.

While what’s said here is true, it can also be said about old cast iron pipes or 50s brick buildings with bitum and asbestos, and such.

source