Re: [News] London Stock Exchange Crashes Because of Microsoft - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: [News] London Stock Exchange Crashes Because of Microsoft - Linux ; * Subway steel peremptorily fired off this memo: >> My bet is Windows **** the bed. > > Earlier this year the new airport extension at Heathrow (?) ground to a halt > when Linux based computers couldn't handle the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Re: [News] London Stock Exchange Crashes Because of Microsoft

  1. Re: [News] London Stock Exchange Crashes Because of Microsoft

    * Subway steel peremptorily fired off this memo:

    >> My bet is Windows **** the bed.

    >
    > Earlier this year the new airport extension at Heathrow (?) ground to a halt
    > when Linux based computers couldn't handle the load and no baggage could be
    > sorted or delivered.


    URL, please.

    > Are you this naive to think that somehow all computer problems are the fault
    > of the OS? Or do you have enough sense to accept the fact that human errors
    > are also a factor and perhaps some systems were designed without the proper
    > capacity or fail-over provisions. Or is it always software and just software
    > that fails?


    My bet is Windows **** the bed.

    Let me enjoy my inane little chuckle, dude.

    --
    Quid me anxius sum?

    [ What? Me, worry? ]

  2. Re: [News] London Stock Exchange Crashes Because of Microsoft

    Linonut espoused:
    > * Subway steel peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >>> My bet is Windows **** the bed.

    >>
    >> Earlier this year the new airport extension at Heathrow (?) ground to a halt
    >> when Linux based computers couldn't handle the load and no baggage could be
    >> sorted or delivered.

    >
    > URL, please.


    The claim is quite untrue. There is a fairly detailed analysis here:
    http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=681

    The real problem at Heathrow Terminal 5 was "Agile Working" combined
    with unrealistic timescales, the consquence was that the systems hadn't
    been properly tested, but nobody was upwards briefing the risks.

    >
    >> Are you this naive to think that somehow all computer problems are the fault
    >> of the OS? Or do you have enough sense to accept the fact that human errors
    >> are also a factor and perhaps some systems were designed without the proper
    >> capacity or fail-over provisions. Or is it always software and just software
    >> that fails?

    >
    > My bet is Windows **** the bed.
    >
    > Let me enjoy my inane little chuckle, dude.
    >


    Anyone foolish enough to build critical infrastructure on a known
    unreliable operating system like Windows rather deserves what they get.
    I'm not aware of any other major stock-market taking such a stupid risk.


    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  3. Re: [News] London Stock Exchange Crashes Because of Microsoft

    In article ,
    Mark Kent wrote:
    > Linonut espoused:
    > > * Subway steel peremptorily fired off this memo:
    > >
    > >>> My bet is Windows **** the bed.
    > >>
    > >> Earlier this year the new airport extension at Heathrow (?) ground
    > >> to a halt when Linux based computers couldn't handle the load and
    > >> no baggage could be sorted or delivered.

    > >
    > > URL, please.

    >
    > The claim is quite untrue. There is a fairly detailed analysis here:
    > http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=681


    There's nothing in there either for or against the claim that the
    systems involved were Linux systems.


    > The real problem at Heathrow Terminal 5 was "Agile Working" combined
    > with unrealistic timescales, the consquence was that the systems hadn't
    > been properly tested, but nobody was upwards briefing the risks.


    So? If the software was running on Linux systems, then it is a Linux
    failure, according to the logic being used with the stock exchange
    failure.

    ....
    > Anyone foolish enough to build critical infrastructure on a known
    > unreliable operating system like Windows rather deserves what they get.
    > I'm not aware of any other major stock-market taking such a stupid risk.


    NYSE (clearing and billing systems--switched from COBOL program on an
    IBM mainframe to a pair of clustered quad processor Windows servers).

    NASDAQ.

    Bolsa de Valores do Estado de Sao Paulo. (That's the largest stock
    exchange in Latin America).

    --
    --Tim Smith

+ Reply to Thread