I wrote a blog post this week detailing what I called this misnaming of legacy applications, suggesting that we should instead call them 'longevity' applications - as essentially, they still work and should be looked upon as things of value.
In an attempt to try and make this renaming of the term stick, let me try and reinforce the point with a few comments from the industry.
So remember, my suggestion is -- just what is a legacy application anyway? It's not a bad thing, it's just software that works right?
Mateen Greenway, HP Fellow and CT EMEA Defence, Security, Government & Healthcare at HP agrees with me.
"Quite right. Anything in production, be it COBOL, Java, Microsoft .Net or a web app written in HTML can be considered a legacy application. The term legacy application should not be perceived as synonymous with senility or anachronism any more than the cloud should be considered a silver bullet," said Greenway.
Relating his comments to my question of whether so-called legacy apps should be migrated to the cloud, Greenway added, "Certainly the cloud has vast potential for improving the efficiency and flexibility of a business but only if leveraged sensibly and, at this stage, selectively."
Simon Gay, CTO at Adapt, an independent IT managed services provider also appears to be on the same page.
"Legacy applications are retained by businesses as they still serve a purpose or deliver value. Complex Unix or mainframe legacy applications will never be contenders for the cloud because the cost of virtualisation will often exceed the cost of updating to more modern code.
"However, some legacy applications are candidates for virtualisation. Intel-based applications can be encapsulated in a virtual "bubble", guaranteeing minimal change with high availability," said Gay.
Come with me on the LONGEVITY trip please.
I'm asking nicely after all :-)