Today, the Space Shuttle Atlantis is scheduled to go on a nearly two-week long space mission to repair and upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope. What does this have to do with Information Technology you may be asking? Quite a bit actually, I think.
Watching recent advertisements from Microsoft and Apple would leave one with the impression that picking your operating system is the first decision that a computer purchaser should make. I believe the Hubble Telescope reminds us al again, that in the Information Age, hardware is really the key issue in any electronic, information processing device. The “right” hardware for your application makes all of the difference in your experience with any computing device. Conversely, crummy hardware can completely ruin the user experience, productivity, and longevity for the same application.
In the case of the Hubble Space Telescope, the geniuses who developed it over twenty years ago permitted battery replacement, constant gyroscope improvements are replacement, and onboard computing architecture that allowed the next generation of processing to be installed on every visit. Of course, the software for the Hubble has also been upgraded continuously, from the ground, permitting the hardware to perform at its best, and giving a way to compensate for many hardware glitches, too. This was most famously done over a decade ago to correct images due to an unexpected mirror bending that was experienced by the system. The key here is that the Hubble designers knew then what many Information Professionals today are only starting to accept: When you do systems engineering, you have to start with an architecture, build the best hardware that you can around it, then and only then pick your operating system, and finally install the applications that you need on top of all that. Possibly self-evident, but this is because once you start building hardware, you have begun limiting your system. You have to have your limitations not constrain your usage requirements. Operating Systems should be thought of as just foundation software because they are replaceable, installable, and customizable to your hardware. Applications should always be considered last since they should be least limiting. You can usually find the application that you need for any operating system, and for others, you can always find someone to custom build it if it is that important.
Returning to our computer case study and the current advertising campaigns, I believe that users should go spec out their needs and budget first. Then they should go purchase the hardware that optimizes that balance between their desires and their available funds. If aesthetics are of concern, they must be factored in during the hardware purchase phase. After the hardware is obtained, whatever operating system that comes on it should be evaluated for effectiveness and replaced with Windows in the case of a Mac, or Linux for PCs or Macs if the OS is judged to be unsuitable. Finally, software applications should be purchased and installed to customize and achieve requirements for the usage case.
Though your environmental requirements may not be as strenuous as space, Information Professionals should approach their computer network systems engineering from the same mindset. After determining the usage requirements and budget, pick the hardware, then the operating system, and finally the software applications. Trying to do it in any other way as Apple and Microsoft both suggest, is a mistake.
God speed to the Shuttle Atlantis Crew and good luck on their Hubble Telescope repairs.
Do you agree with me? Are there factors that are more important than hardware? Have I forgotten any?
That is my Information Technology Thought of the Day (ITTOD) for May 12, 2009 ©Scott Coughlin.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Why Hardware Is Always King
Today, the Space Shuttle Atlantis is scheduled to go on a nearly two-week long space mission to repair and upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope. What does this have to do with Information Technology you may be asking? Quite a bit actually, I think.
Watching recent advertisements from Microsoft and Apple would leave one with the impression that picking your operating system is the first decision that a computer purchaser should make. I believe the Hubble Telescope reminds us al again, that in the Information Age, hardware is really the key issue in any electronic, information processing device. The “right” hardware for your application makes all of the difference in your experience with any computing device. Conversely, crummy hardware can completely ruin the user experience, productivity, and longevity for the same application.
In the case of the Hubble Space Telescope, the geniuses who developed it over twenty years ago permitted battery replacement, constant gyroscope improvements are replacement, and onboard computing architecture that allowed the next generation of processing to be installed on every visit. Of course, the software for the Hubble has also been upgraded continuously, from the ground, permitting the hardware to perform at its best, and giving a way to compensate for many hardware glitches, too. This was most famously done over a decade ago to correct images due to an unexpected mirror bending that was experienced by the system. The key here is that the Hubble designers knew then what many Information Professionals today are only starting to accept: When you do systems engineering, you have to start with an architecture, build the best hardware that you can around it, then and only then pick your operating system, and finally install the applications that you need on top of all that. Possibly self-evident, but this is because once you start building hardware, you have begun limiting your system. You have to have your limitations not constrain your usage requirements. Operating Systems should be thought of as just foundation software because they are replaceable, installable, and customizable to your hardware. Applications should always be considered last since they should be least limiting. You can usually find the application that you need for any operating system, and for others, you can always find someone to custom build it if it is that important.
Returning to our computer case study and the current advertising campaigns, I believe that users should go spec out their needs and budget first. Then they should go purchase the hardware that optimizes that balance between their desires and their available funds. If aesthetics are of concern, they must be factored in during the hardware purchase phase. After the hardware is obtained, whatever operating system that comes on it should be evaluated for effectiveness and replaced with Windows in the case of a Mac, or Linux for PCs or Macs if the OS is judged to be unsuitable. Finally, software applications should be purchased and installed to customize and achieve requirements for the usage case.
Though your environmental requirements may not be as strenuous as space, Information Professionals should approach their computer network systems engineering from the same mindset. After determining the usage requirements and budget, pick the hardware, then the operating system, and finally the software applications. Trying to do it in any other way as Apple and Microsoft both suggest, is a mistake.
God speed to the Shuttle Atlantis Crew and good luck on their Hubble Telescope repairs.
Do you agree with me? Are there factors that are more important than hardware? Have I forgotten any?
That is my Information Technology Thought of the Day (ITTOD) for May 12, 2009 ©Scott Coughlin.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
This entry was posted by Scott Coughlin on May 12, 2009 at 5:03 am, and is filed under Hardware, Information Technology, News Commentary. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0.You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.