1. Tech companies stay relevant by reinventing new markets via new languages / frameworks.
2. New programmers can side step the "rookie" condition by adopting a new language thus leveling the playing field for that language / framework (i.e. everyone is a rookie). Plus whatever is new is hot, and everyone wants to know what's hot.
3. Because of this, few are interested in old languages. I was in college in the 1990s and COBOL was pretty much out as far as anything anyone wanted to learn. It was all Windows.
So based on 1-3, the reason "we must replace it because it's old!" mentality is out of necessity. The older the system / language, the harder it will be to find people to work on it. This has inherent risk. Of course these banking systems have decades of business logic, acquisition logic, and government regulations built into them, rewriting it has it's own massive risk.
My guess as to where that came from:
1. Tech companies stay relevant by reinventing new markets via new languages / frameworks. 2. New programmers can side step the "rookie" condition by adopting a new language thus leveling the playing field for that language / framework (i.e. everyone is a rookie). Plus whatever is new is hot, and everyone wants to know what's hot. 3. Because of this, few are interested in old languages. I was in college in the 1990s and COBOL was pretty much out as far as anything anyone wanted to learn. It was all Windows.
So based on 1-3, the reason "we must replace it because it's old!" mentality is out of necessity. The older the system / language, the harder it will be to find people to work on it. This has inherent risk. Of course these banking systems have decades of business logic, acquisition logic, and government regulations built into them, rewriting it has it's own massive risk.