Contrary to what? I said as much. The problem is that you need to quantify that efficiency. You can't just say "x is efficient."
> But if you're running a business with "x" which has worked efficiently for years and isn't broken, "y" is not necessary.
So, x has worked efficiently for years? Based on what? How are you quantifying that? And how can you say it's efficient without having some yardstick to measure against? By not looking at other technologies, you can't really say whether it is still efficient or not.
Contrary to what? I said as much. The problem is that you need to quantify that efficiency. You can't just say "x is efficient."
> But if you're running a business with "x" which has worked efficiently for years and isn't broken, "y" is not necessary.
So, x has worked efficiently for years? Based on what? How are you quantifying that? And how can you say it's efficient without having some yardstick to measure against? By not looking at other technologies, you can't really say whether it is still efficient or not.
Efficiency is a moving target.