# Failed Windows 3.1 system blamed for shutting down Paris airport



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

The timing on this, btw, sucks.

From Ars Technica:

*Failed Windows 3.1 system blamed for shutting down Paris airport
And the people who understand the old operating system are all retiring.*


> Paris Orly airport had to close temporarily last Saturday after the failure of a system running Windows 3.1-yes, the operating system from 1992-left it unable to operate in fog.
> 
> French satirical weekly Le Canard Enchaîné reported the failure, and Vice expanded on the claims.
> 
> Orly uses a system called DECOR to communicate Runway Visual Range (RVR) information to pilots. In poor weather conditions-such as the fog the airport experienced on Saturday-this system is essential. Last Saturday it stopped working, and the airport struggled to figure out why.


FULL ARTICLE HERE


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

I could not believe that something like that could happen except that I know that it could.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The thing is... I know on the surface people will read a story like this and think it's crazy for something important to be running on such an old operating system... BUT it would be far crazier for them to be running on the latest operating system and constantly patching and monitoring for new problems.

Stuff like this tends to evolve where they needed a system to do a thing... and they finally got one that worked reliably... and that's the only thing that system needs to do... so there's zero need to be running the latest and greatest which may or may not have its own unexpected problems. The problem, however, comes as people retire who are familiar with legacy systems and the new crop of techies can't handle older stuff.

It's hard to argue what the solution for stuff like this really is, because it makes perfect sense to stick with a perfected system even when it is outdated... I guess companies just have to start devoting a small side-task for people to run newer solutions to see how they can migrate to newer technology without disturbing the functional online system they need to rely upon day-to-day.

Then you have stuff like when US OTA went from analog to digital and they had to run two systems concurrently in order to do the switchover. That costs a lot of money, and not all companies can afford that... and since often newer operating systems require newer hardware... it can be tough to have the migration for something major as a side-project too.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

I believe in the adage "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." So I get that a dedicated single-purpose system like this that works hasn't been replaced. I'm not quite sure how well it integrates into the whole computerized environment for controllers and pilots, however.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

...and I recall the ancient scriptural admonition about_ 'putting new wine into old skins'_,
with the 'new wine' being new software, updates, patches, fixes and other assorted
crap piling on that will eventually bring any outdated OS to a grinding halt.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

People I France are still using Windows 3.1? Strange that those peeps never had any Windows upgrades.


Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

It has nothing to do with the availability of OS upgrades, it's that much of the equipment is for a specific task that even a computer from the 80s running DOS can handle.

Many use older interfaces like ISA that are not available on current PCs. The equipment it's handling isn't things you can find at Best Buy, and it's not as simple as getting updated drivers and applications after you upgrade windows.

It's either keep it running on an older computer who's sole purpose is to control that machine and nothing else, or replace millions of dollars worth of working equipment just so you can run it on Windows 10. And good luck trying to use the equipment if one of the many background processes that run when the PC is idle decides to hog resources the moment you need to use the equipment. Or if it's something that is only used occasionally, you have to wait for windows to finish downloading tons of missed updates and reboot multiple times before you can finally use it.

As for this failure, notice it's the first time you're even hearing about it after the 20+ years the machine has been in use. Compare that to what would probably happen if it was a more complex modern OS running things and something not even related to the one thing the PC needs to do causes a problem.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

phrelin said:


> I believe in the adage "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." So I get that a dedicated single-purpose system like this that works hasn't been replaced. I'm not quite sure how well it integrates into the whole computerized environment for controllers and pilots, however.


Yeah, in a closed system who cares what os it is running if its solid...

But one does have to wonder if newer would also offer more things that would be better. We don't know in this case....

And at some point the system may break down, so if you don't have people that can truly take care of it, then you need to upgrade so people can, or train people to up keep it....


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There are a lot of systems running on embedded XP that need to be upgraded. Requiring 3.1 seems like a stretch - they should have upgraded the system itself somewhere along the line beyond the need for 3.1.

Part of the problem with the retiring engineers is the tech savvy of the next generation. If they can't find the answer on an Internet search engine they are lost. Google help for Windows 3.1 and you'll likely receive more scorn for using the operating system than help keeping it running.

I can't remember the last 3.1 machine I had running. I had a Windows 95 machine doing a specific task at work a few years ago. I wrote some special programs that ran on XP and Vista programs that still run on Windows 7 - so they would be OK upgrading.

At my current job there are a handful of XP machines that we are waiting for a specific vendor to update their unique software. They are firewalled to let them connect only to the machines that they need to connect to.

It does not surprise me to see something mission critical on 3.1.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

Assuming 1995 technology, and looking at hard drive prices, you are looking at storage space that is measured in the MB, not GB, and definitely not TB. Processor around 80386 or 80486. Wasn't there a BIOS limitation on hard drives around that time of 2.1GB? And communication interfaces using RS-232 (serial) ports, maybe some specialty ISA cards.

Now, look at modern computer systems. Anyone use a floppy drive anymore? How about optical media? Nope, you are more likely to have a USB flash drive on your keychain. (I have two: a 16GB for personal stuff, and a collection of utilities/drivers on a 32GB drive).



James Long said:


> There are a lot of systems running on embedded XP that need to be upgraded. Requiring 3.1 seems like a stretch - they should have upgraded the system itself somewhere along the line beyond the need for 3.1.
> 
> Part of the problem with the retiring engineers is the tech savvy of the next generation. If they can't find the answer on an Internet search engine they are lost. Google help for Windows 3.1 and you'll likely receive more scorn for using the operating system than help keeping it running.
> 
> ...


My experience, having a job in a Software-as-a-Service which works with multiple multinational corporations, is that IT is considered an expense that has to be minimized until it directly affects a vice-president. Any time you perform an upgrade beyond a minor bug-fix, you are going to have training on the changes, and griping about all the lost productivity. This will be especially with the salespeople who attitude is, "If I'm not out there selling, I'm not making money." Combine that with accounting's attitude of "If it ain't broke, why spend the money to fix it?"

And, part of my job is dealing with financial institutions, pharmaceuticals, and medical companies, all of which require locked-down versions of software due to regulatory issues. You can imagine the fun I have in convincing them to upgrade.

Ain't IT a wonderful field to be in?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The key is to help the VP understand that Windows 3.1 is broken ... XP is broken (and everything in between). One would not keep an obsolete widget stamper that is high maintenance cost and more likely to injure employees than work correctly. XP and earlier versions are obsolete widget stampers that should be eradicated ASAP.

The hard part is explaining that now nearly all of the old machines are gone and replaced by Windows 7 that the new widget stamper operating system will need to be replaced in a couple of years. XP was around too long. VPs that thought "yeah, lets get rid of the decades old technology" may not be ready for the next round.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

James Long said:


> It does not surprise me to see something mission critical on 3.1.


It does surprise me that whether it was running 3.1, 3.3, 95 etc. that there was not a backup available.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Too many times there is one machine in a corner somewhere where the tech hopes it keeps running until it is replaced or the tech is gone to the next job with no way to contact them. I have seen these machines at several businesses over the years.

A backup machine would be nice. But it sounds like they were having a challenge keeping one machine running.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

Text files used to have a limit of 64K bytes/ASCI characters. I think the early e-mails did, too.

Might COBOL have anything to do with someone staying with Windows 3.1? I was doing field service work for a PPV movie company that was running SpectraVision's old discards, and when year 2000 arrived, they had to backdate their clocks to find a leap year where the days matched up with the year 2000 days, and the customers got printed bills that said like 1980-something on them.

A good friend of mine, who was an engineer for IBM and who actually studied BASIC under professor Kemeny back when he was still developing BASIC, was still using Windows XP last week when I corresponded with him regarding .PDF-to-text conversions, but I think he does to just to be Geekey. He still has Postum for breakfast, even though they stopped making it years ago.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

This conversation is relevant here too... because we've discussed embedded systems like the Dish (or DirecTV) and cable set-top boxes that are often running a specialized linux operating system. Those setups will not be running the latest versions, but rather whatever stable version they were able to get to do what they wanted it to do at the time of release. They might apply some patches after release, but they aren't likely to upgrade our set-top boxes with newer linux releases... rather that would be folded into a different hardware set-top box down the road. They can streamline and customize and run a set-top box on an older linux release and a less-than-modern CPU and run circles around a more modern platform for the targeted task since everything is optimized for just that.

That's what places like this airport would be aiming for as well. They don't want an embedded system that they have to patch and update and replace multiple times a year nor one that will require updating all the hardware every few years to keep up with the bloated software. What they want is a setup that is stable, but limited, and performs specific tasks and can be setup and maintained with minimal effort for years of service.

Usually companies like this and governments too will pay for service contracts. I'm surprised, for instance, that they wouldn't have had a service contract with Microsoft paying for some sort of support. As recently as 2005 IBM was still selling and supporting OS/2 globally, though you might not have known it since you couldn't just walk up and buy it anywhere. I can't say for sure, but I suspect in at least some parts of the world that IBM still has service contracts active to support some OS/2 installations today.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

Well, if it weren't for needing Internet and printing out receipts I would be happy with only DOS. My banking statement programme and word processor are both DOS. These both will not launch on Windows 10.


Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SeaBeagle said:


> Well, if it weren't for needing Internet and printing out receipts I would be happy with only DOS. My banking statement programme and word processor are both DOS. These both will not launch on Windows 10.
> 
> Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


Is Is Windows 10 itself or moving to a 64 bit version of 10?

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> Is Is Windows 10 itself or moving to a 64 bit version of 10?
> 
> Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk


Windows 10 on my ACER all in one computer is a 64 bit version. My DELL desktop thank God has Windows XP. File directories on XP are not as complicated as Windows 7 and 10 are.

Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

It might work under dosbox. 

Yeah, I at first didn't like when they switched to the users structure, but got used to it long ago. Though I still do wish that the all users desktop and start menu folder were in the same area. 

When it got to the point of Microsoft dropping security patches, I forced my mother over to 7. Hardest part was her Daytimers software, but there's a yahoo group of diehard users that even wrote new dlls and it even works on 64 bit Win 10. 

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> It might work under dosbox.
> 
> Yeah, I at first didn't like when they switched to the users structure, but got used to it long ago. Though I still do wish that the all users desktop and start menu folder were in the same area.
> 
> ...


Not me security or no so security. Will not change computer to anything it XP.

Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> It might work under dosbox.
> 
> Yeah, I at first didn't like when they switched to the users structure, but got used to it long ago. Though I still do wish that the all users desktop and start menu folder were in the same area.
> 
> ...


I would be able to install Windows XP on my Windows 10 computer using this dosbox programme?

Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SeaBeagle said:


> Not me security or no so security. Will not change computer to anything it XP.
> 
> Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


At least you aren't on 98 SE like another forum member 

But I have to provide tech support for my parents and I can't guarantee they won't click something they shouldn't etc.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SeaBeagle said:


> I wood able to install Windows XP on my Windows 10 computer using this dosbox programme?
> 
> Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


A dos program might run on dos box. XP would run under a program called virtualbox.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> A dos program might run on dos box. XP would run under a program called virtualbox.


I used that meathod some time ago. Not as good as a regular installation.

Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> At least you aren't on 98 SE like another forum member
> 
> But I have to provide tech support for my parents and I can't guarantee they won't click something they shouldn't etc.


I was glad to see Windows XP been born when I had Windows 98.

Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

SeaBeagle said:


> I used that meathod some time ago. Not as good as a regular installation.
> 
> Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


No, but it is safer when Internet connected. Windows 7 also has XP mode, which runs a version of XP transparently in the background. But you had to have Win 7 Pro or higher, Home wasn't licensed for it.

Keep in mind, Chrome is dropping support so you want to make sure you use a browser that will still get updated.

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

IMHO There is zero reason to try and hold onto xp for personal use. Companies with proprietary software for machines and such I understand but for personal use its not worth the lack of security updates to even consider keeping it long term. While I think just jumping to Windows 10 is the way to go for hold outs Windows 7 would be fine too. I've seen no real usability difference between 10 and 7 which is the main reason I updated. 8 was something I avoided because of its gui. 10 is great again.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

The only issue is that if you actually have an XP system that was made during the tone it was current, to go to Windows 10 realistically means a new computer. 

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dpeters11 said:


> The only issue is that if you actually have an XP system that was made during the tone it was current, to go to Windows 10 realistically means a new computer.


At home I have replaced more operating systems due to hardware failure than due to wanting the new OS.
The licensing at work is different ... so those machines may get a new OS (if hardware permits) before a failure. But work also has those pesky throwback machines where a particular software provider won't certify their upgrade on a new OS - so one is stuck in the past until the vendor catches up.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

That's the thing... You might have hardware that cannot run a newer operating system... and you might have peripheral devices (scanner, printer, etc.) that don't have drivers written for newer operating systems. I can't tell you how many scanners I had to replace over the years because you couldn't get them to work with a newer operating system... and the scanners were good scanners.

Also, software... sometimes software that does a certain thing doesn't exist anymore. You still need it, but not a lot of people do... so you can't get new software to do what your old software does AND the old software might not run in a newer operating system.

I am a proponent of virtual machines... I used to keep current on VMWare releases so I could always create a virtual machine of an older O/S that I owned if I needed old software. My father did this quite a bit, working as a freelance Technical Illustrator where he would run into people who needed an older version of a file exported or something and current software wouldn't go back that far... so he'd have to go back as far as he could, then run an older version on the older O/S to go back even further to save for some clients. He also had a few good programs that were perfectly good for what he needed to do so why buy new software to do what the software he already had did? Virtual machine... that let him do the same as I do, and have reasonably recent hardware and operating system BUT easy access to older stuff.

But, that's one computer and 1 user license... not quite the same as embedded systems or a big network or something that does a specialized task.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I actually know someone that has a system that came with Windows 8 and can't go to 10 because drivers weren't released. Her system is one of those All in One machines so the hardware isn't standard.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> I actually know someone that has a system that came with Windows 8 and can't go to 10 because drivers weren't released. Her system is one of those All in One machines so the hardware isn't standard.


My Intel Compute Stick that came with 8.1 in May will not upgrade to 10. I've tried everything recommended by Microsoft and everything i could find on the web. Intel is silent on the issue.

It just starts the upgrade, appears to be doing just fine, and after an hour or so gives up and rolls back.

It's not a big deal for me, but it is one of those irritants.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

James Long said:


> The key is to help the VP understand that Windows 3.1 is broken ... XP is broken (and everything in between). One would not keep an obsolete widget stamper that is high maintenance cost and more likely to injure employees than work correctly. XP and earlier versions are obsolete widget stampers that should be eradicated ASAP.
> 
> The hard part is explaining that now nearly all of the old machines are gone and replaced by Windows 7 that the new widget stamper operating system will need to be replaced in a couple of years. XP was around too long. VPs that thought "yeah, lets get rid of the decades old technology" may not be ready for the next round.


Yeah, you and I understand that. The executive, however, doesn't. They are too worried about the stock price and performance bonuses.

Things are going to change though. Instead of having actual software deployed to the computer, any application that can be run through a web browser will be run through a web browser. Thus, the updates can be deployed at the server end instead of deployed out to all of the computers in a org.


----------

