Voice of the masses: Debian moves on
Debian are dropping support for 586-class processors in the newer versions of the distro. In simple terms, this means that original Pentium chips will stop working after Debian Jessie (which is supported until 2020). Pentium 2 (which came out in 1995), Pentium Pro and newer chips will continue to work. This change should increase the performance on newer chips by making it easier for software to take advantage of more modern processor features. By the time the support ends, Debian, a non-profit organisation run by volunteers will have supported this hardware for over 25 years.
Also in the news, Google (ok, Alphabet) have used a software update to brick smart home hardware that’s less than two years old (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/05/revolv-devices-bricked-google-nest-smart-home). Only after internet outcry did Google (ok, Alphabet) agree to refund the owners.
Our question this fortnight is: How long do you think hardware should get software updates for? Is two years acceptable in this modern world of consumable devices? Is 25 years just about right even though it may mean the software is less efficient on newer devices? Should we split the difference and say 13years 6 months? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below and we’ll read them out on the upcoming podcast.
(we know we can’t directly compare the two situations because older devices will still be able to run Debain without updates indefinitely whereas Google (ok, Alphabet) actually stopped the devices from working, but there’re two recent situations that have highlighted this point).
Related Posts
About The Author
Ben Everard
Ben Everard is the co-author of Learning Python with the Raspberry Pi and hacks hardware projects held together with a big dollop of Linux and Free Software glue. He's @ben_everard on Twitter.
As long as possible.
🙂
How long do you think hardware should get software updates for?
For as long as the developer wishes to maintain it.
If you dont like it, there are alternatives. The developer that maintains support for the older equipment will benefit if there is a need from users.
Sometimes you just have to move on.
A ‘for-profit’ corporation will provide just as much support as it feels it must to avoid upseting too many users. I guess a few thousand early adopters being upset doesn’t really bother Google when they are aiming to sell IoT to billions of people.
Debian is probably about right for a community project though I can see problems if it works through to the derivatives. My quad-core home-brew desktop built from not especially ancient parts about 2 years ago won’t run 64bit versions of Ubuntu or Mint, it seems to be a graphics chipset problem but rather than figure it out I just run the 32bit version. Oh well…
For as long as it’s needed or viable commercially, but if they no longer want to support it formally then open source it and move into the community. If there is continuing interest then it will be supported.
“if they no longer want to support it formally then open source it and move into the community.”
+1
I think LagerMon obviously has a point, but I think you could say what would be reasonable to expect. Personally, I would say it is not unreasonable to expect “simpler” devices to be supported for longer as the commitment to do so would presumably be less, whereas for something as complicated as a computer, continuing to support it for years and years has a greater cost in terms of time and money.
You would hope that the market would level itself, and those manufacturers who make things obsolete quickly would equally quickly lose their market share.
So much for being the “universal operating system.”
Snark aside, I can’t get upset over this.
I suspect that the percentage of 486 and 586 machines that remains functional is very small. Stuff wears out; it happens. My last Pentium III died about four years ago (I do have 686 class machine that current is running 32-bit Mageia).
The linux kernel can’t be all things to all men and women – even Linus thinks that we’d benefit from another, much smaller kernel. As long as we leave a little note to say which version of debian was the last to support the early Pentium processors, then people who are using that hardware can still use, and possibly even maintain it.
As far as I am aware, the last boxes with an i586 class processor were produced around 2006.
Debian’s support for i586 processors always seemed a bit ludicrous to me, mostly because most boxes from the “original” i586 era probably have insufficient RAM to run Debian at all, let alone well.
There are better alternatives for hardware that old – I believe that Alpine Linux still supports i586 hardware, and should have a much lighter profile.
Let the manufacturers choose themselves but force them to make it clear to the buyer before they buy the product.
At the end of the checkout line there should be a captcha making sure the buyer knows the expiration date, if the buyer gets it wrong they can’t buy the product.
For commercially bought products:
The hardware and its software should be made publically available for GPL opensource/openhardware once they claim to not support it commercially.
I believe the hardware should be commercially supported for as long as would be expected for the type of product in question. For example a fridge should be expected to last at least 15 years and the same goes for a washing machine, regardless of the price. The company that made it and also the company that sold it should be “reasonably” liable for this. New Zealand has something similiar to this in their consumer guarantees act.
My Gas Boiler is now over thirty years old and still works well. Any replacement would be very expensive, would not last nearly as long and the energy efficiency would not pay back the replacement costs. If it works okay, fulfils its function then why change?
My oldest computer is my Dragon 32 which still works but most definitely not my go to computer!
If the manufacturers of these old working devices could just pull the plug, I would be very upset.
There is a big difference between ending support and stopping something from working at all. That’s outrageous, imagine applying that to the software in your car? Several have already advocated going open source but maybe it should be compulsory. Another round of EU v Google our best hope?
Yes stopping it working knowingly and gleefully is just wrong.
What happened to the doing no evil that google claims.
Where are you suppose to throw the bricked devices?
Send them overseas where kids pick them apart for rare earth metals!
Refunding customers doesnt cancel waste to the environment.
The devices could be more useful if made to be reused and with length of time in mind
While it looks like Alphabet went a bit far, what is the alternative? Do we seriously want to force developers to maintain support when they don’t wish to, for whatever reason? I think a competitive marketplace where you have different options available is the best answer.
There is a difference between not supporting something and deliberately switching it off. Especially if it cost to install it in the first place.
I think that fact that we are having this debate itself is telling. It is like complaining to your current girlfriend when she throws away the pictures of your ex-girlfriends….I think…having not had one, I am only guessing here. We have a community of consumers that might get upset when a system that is 25 years out of date, is no longer supported by another community of developers voluntarily out of sheer goodwill. These developers have provided support as long as there had been demand for it despite the effort required to maintain compatibility. In actual fact, just because the kernel is no longer being updated, doesn’t mean that these systems will suddenly stop working…existing software would presumably continue to work until exploited by some manic hacker bored from attacking Windows 3.1 devices. Of course, that they will be more effectively replaced by a pi zero, is neither here nor there.
Look, there has always been the boast of Linux developers that they can get Linux to run on anything with a NAND gate, be it a super computer or a toaster. It is possible to continue supporting 586….you just have to do it yourself. As for deliberate bricking of devices…it is a despicable, murderous tactic.
All I can say is thank goodness Freeola still allows me to connect to the internet on dialup, otherwise I wouldn’t be able to IRC from my 16k zx spectrum.
I think shorter support periods are fine, IF it’s made clear at the start that that is what you’re getting. If I download some guy’s remixed ‘trump-for-president-buntu’, I don’t expect it to stay supported for long. The short support time is implied. If I make a long-term investment in a smart light switch or something, then I believe support should last many years, especially since I’ve handed over money with the expectation that I’ll get a working device in return.
Hardware should be supported forever. There are copious amounts of archived data all over the world on Phillips original video disks… Unfortunately this data can’t be read as the hardware is no longer produced. What happens when someone needs to access data that is extremely important from a legal/scientific standpoint and the data is “lost”. What happens when an update to the operating system no longer includes support for an insignificantly small data controller – at the heart of a nuclear missile guidance system…
I have an Underwood 5. It’s a heavy black typewriter about one hundred years old. It works perfectly after all that time, even if it would work still better if I oil it a little (the equivalent to updating the kernel!). Computers were not designed to last too many time; perhaps, 10 years maximum?
I think that any computer’s owner has the right to decide how much time will use a specific device. Either 2 years or 15 years. It’s their very decision. If the machine does the work he/she needs, everything is right.
So, I think that any computer should last as much time as possible, either for its first owner or for subsequence owners.
We all know that with Windows OS it’s quite impossible to keep a computer as their very first day for many years (even XP is already “dead” after 12 years, but many of us know that this has been a very special and unusual case to last so long time).
We, Linux users, have almost every solution to keep even the very old computers in working order, even if, in many cases, we’ll be far from running the most recent software.
So, if not the maker of the computer, there should, for instance, exist a group of volunteers capable to bring all of us drivers, BIOS updates, etc, in order to keep any hardware alive for many time as possible. This will be good for our pockets as well as for the whole planet.
It may be true that silicon is immortal; this is certainly not the case with electrolytic capacitors. 10-15 years of continuous operation seems to be the most one can hope for.
Motherboards will at best have a similar lifespan, as such capacitors is a key component. Going beyond 2020, the Debian developers may have some serious problems finding i586 rigs for their own use.