It sounds like a problem to me for the simple fact that replacement parts are near impossible to find, and it's clearly costing the taxpayer a lot of money. That alone should be reason enough to upgrade.
It's also a huge security problem because many of these machines were designed before modern security procedures were invented. How am I supposed to maintain a cryptographically secure password system on a machine with a processor too slow to run a hashing algorithm?
> I'm skeptical that building a modern system would really save money since the temptation for feature creep is too great.
So, because we might be tempted to add a few features, we shouldn't upgrade technology? I don't understand where this weird pseudo-luddite mentality in the tech world comes from. I see it all the time in tech forums, and I just don't get it.
"If it's not broke, don't fix it" is a fun, catchy phrase, but it really breaks down as soon as you try to apply it anywhere. "Hey, you should really change the oil in your car." "If it's not broke, don't fix it."