"Venerable" does not quite mean "decrepit". The meaning is more like respect for an elder. "Official standard" or not, it has been around as a real language since the early 90s (Borland?), which definitely makes it an elder in computer land. I mean, Windows is written in C++ and it definitely gets the "venerable" title by now.

I'm apparently obsolete in my thinking :)

My familiarity is mostly with older installs and the problems in keeping older infrastructure working. There is a whole cottage industry built around that very problem... lots of things out there like serial to Ethernet converters. You can slowly modernize this kind of a system, but at some point you have to start moving things over to a more modern controller.

If we are talking control systems, then the best bet is to go browse the popular offerings from Schneider or Siemens. Those will be around and supported for a very long time, and you won't be the only idiot out there building a factory with it. You naturally want to update things - that's the whole point of this question - but it is not like you are going to be continuously upgrading the core architecture over the 25 year life. I would not be surprised at all if the same architecture is in place for 25 years at a single installation. Sure, you'll swap out parts and maybe even the controller a few times - but it will all look very familiar to the guy who originally spec'd it, and new people will roll their eyes and laugh at it.

If it is something in IT land, that is out of my field. There are many suggestions on here - but I'm betting that anything popular (Linux, Windows, BSDs, mainframes) will run in emulation going forward. I'd probably avoid Oracle, Apple, or other proprietary hardware - even though I told you to go with proprietary stuff for the factory :)

I think we're talking past one another. The original poster is asking about future-proofing his development, not freezing development. Naturally you want the system to be adaptable and as easy to update as is possible - but the basic architecture is probably going to be pretty much frozen in time. "Upgraded" equipment is usually compatible with the same interface, and they tend to make popular interfaces for a very long time. Even when the interface becomes obsolete, there is usually a very long period with transitional hardware. At some point - unless you are lucky - you are looking at replacing the controller, and that can be quite painful so it makes sense to (a) put that off as long as possible, (b) spend time up front picking a popular and flexible platform.

My young kids don't even ask for the TV - they only want the tablets. We sometimes reflexively put something on TV for them, and they often ask if they can't watch it on the tablets instead.

Heh, don't buy stock in that company.

I'm doing a very minor thing at work right now in the same vein. We have some ancient equipment that would cost $60-70k to replace. It still works, but the data collection PC just died. It had a workflow involving macros, Windows 2000, and several serial ports. I need to get it all working with the Win7 replacement - but at least it is all simple serial communication and the equipment seems amenable to USB adapters, and the communication is well-documented. There are two stations, so it isn't exactly time-critical - but I totally get why people would not want to spend money until absolutely necessary.

I don't think many people would wait until their last spare to start retrofitting their system. At the same time, you want to stretch your investment as long as you can get away with it.

In the case of old style PLCs, there have been a number of transitional technologies, since so many people were in the same situation.

This is good advice. You want a whole bunch of other people to be in the same pickle as yourself. That means there is a market, and where there is a market there will be a vendor catering to very old system support.

That depends on the application. If he's making an industrial control system, then no, he probably will not be maintaining it organically. It will get built, qualified, and then expected to run for the life of the process. Think nuclear plant... what is more painful, re-qualification or running obsolete tools? Plants built in the 80s (power, sewer, etc) are still running DOS control systems with ancient serial PLCs.

That's brilliant, actually.

Linux is at the heart of many embedded devices, most smartphones, and a whole crapload of servers. Given the staying power of golden oldies like COBOL running on mainframes (or virtualized mainframes), I don't think that there is any doubt that the Linux kernel will be around.

I'm as skeptical of "green" marketing as anyone, but I fully recognize that early adopters ultimately help the technology progress. Solar panels spent over 50 years in development before finally becoming cost effective over their lifetime.

I'll try to be more sarcastic next time.

All of them, or just the ones who are in power?

I'm going to invent a new word called draggling, and that is how they will extract even more from the ground. Fracking is a stupid word, too, and we never heard of it until they "ran out" of oil the first time.