Analog Systems don't Age Better Than Digital Systems

Many people in the car community (myself included) seem to think that analog = good, however it’s simply a manifestation of bias. survivorship bias isn’t the right term, however it’s close. The people who are most vocal about older/analog cars being better simply weren’t around the drive properly old cars (advent of automobile – early 80s) which is when all cars were analog (out of necessity) and were well and truly shit.

• See the 3rd gen camaro and it’s competitors for proof that analog doesn’t necessarily age well.

However those older analog vehicles that are shit seem to have been erased from peoples memory possibly because they don’t conform to this agenda that’s being pushed online.

Saying a 996 Porsche with an automatic hasn’t aged as well as a manual NOT because of digital vs analog but because you’re comparing two systems,

• one that has virtually reached the end of it’s development (the manual transmission)
• one that is in it’s absolute infancy (automatic trans)

That’s why this doesn’t apply to something like a Ford Model T, because everything about that car is analog, however it’s still a bad car, because all the technologies employed in that car were still in their infancies.

The more accurate statement would be

Systems That Have Neared the Peak of Their Development Age Much Better Than Technologies in Their First Iterations

Unfortunately that doesn’t roll of the tongue quite so well.

Apr-24-2023

Today I remembered this note in the context of what I am working to build – the general pupose manufacturing machine. People love to compare 3D printing to technologies like Injection Molding, CNC machining, and other 100+ year old technologies that have reached the peak of their development curve.