The true death knell.
Now if only I could get my employer to stop supporting obsolete platforms…
Compiling a personal project of mine with Windows 2000 as minimum Windows platform right now
We have a mail sorter that runs on Windows 3.1.
We used to have a borescope that saved pictures and some jet engine engineers always requested them when we checked for fuel coking. The thing was heavy, massive and ran on Windows 3.1. It would save one picture at it’s highest resolution on a single floppy but wouldn’t have enough space for another. So for each picture, we had to load in a new floppy. Then find the floppy drive with a USB.
I put a new borescope in the budget and it got knocked off for other stuff of course. As far as I know, they’re still using it because a company that profits billions per year and hundreds of millions on this project couldn’t afford a new one.
Why not use a Windows 3.1 VM in DOSBox and use a local directory as your C drive so you can easily add and remove files from the Win3.1 instance?
Unless the borescope has have physical hardware that can run Win3.1?
Virtual Machines have really kind of solved the “but I need old software” issue.
You’d be surprised how often the actual, physical hardware is just chugging along on “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mindset.
I’m sadly quite aware of it, it’s more that it’s a little shocking that VMs aren’t being rolled out in respect to it, considering how mature the technology is.
Honestly, how expensive is a borescope these days?
I picked up a cheap USB one to look at my garbage disposal’s interior a while back. I think it was something like $50.
Now, I can believe that this jet engine one is fancier, but unless it images outside the visible spectrum or has to be inserted into a recently-running, hot engine and survive hot temperatures or something, I doubt that it’s that much fancier. There’s only so much that a CCD and light on the end of a cable can do.
Welcome to Linux friends!
