What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Introducing DJ Hero Game view!
djhero.com - Scratch and mix 102 songs in 93 original mixes from today's hottest artists. Available Now.
141 Comments
- bugalou, on 07/03/2009, -9/+92And I am sure it had nothing to do with the coding of the actual program.
- m3arvk, on 07/03/2009, -7/+67Exactly. Because it would be impossible to write a ***** program which runs on Linux.
- tamothy, on 07/03/2009, -2/+61This won't be the first time people are jumping out of Windows because of stocks.
- eraccusa, on 07/01/2009, -11/+68Trading stocks - $$$
Having your Microsoft based stock trading system utterly fail in front of the world - priceless - Rev0lver, on 07/03/2009, -14/+55ah, so we blame the platform, not the way the actual program was written, for being utter ***** now? Glad to see logic prevails over all.
- maz2331, on 07/03/2009, -3/+39Windows, Linux - who cares?
For a system of this size and reliability needs, they should be using ACTUAL REAL MAINFRAMES that guarantee the uptime and reliability necessary. Call IBM and order a few Z-10s already.
Mainframes still have a place, and a stock exchange is part of it. - inactive, on 07/03/2009, -9/+37This. I wonder why every other major corporation in the world that uses a Windows based system isn't having the same catastrophic problem. It's your software most likely, not the OS. Unless they were using a horrible outdated version of Windows. Either case, it's their own fault.
- DivisibleByZero, on 07/03/2009, -5/+31Having worked in the IT department of a large investment bank, I can confidently say the operating system was probably not at fault in this case. Bad code is still bad code when run on Unix.
- Frostek, on 07/01/2009, -28/+52An impressive win for Linux.
- bugalou, on 07/03/2009, -8/+28I would just like to chime in that I work in IT for a major Casino/Gaming company and 90% of our servers run Windows for various critical applications. We have very few platform stability issues with these boxes. Errors tend to come from the programs themselves. Keep in mind Casinos are a 24/7/365 business so this is a maximum abuse environment.
We tend to have the most issues out of the one application we have running on Unix/AIX, but I recognize that is no fault of Unix and is due to crap coding on the vendor's part. :) - Chris_F, on 07/03/2009, -8/+26As much as I adore GNU/Linux (unix like operating systems in general) there is nothing inherently wrong with Windows NT based operating systems. In the end, it is the fault of the programmers and the system administrators. I'm sorry, but pointing your finger and trying to use Microsoft as a scapegoat for your own failure is unacceptable.
- inactive, on 07/03/2009, -9/+24Why did it crash that day to begin with?
Also, I wish this was linked to a news source and not a Linux-biased blog. - Noctem, on 07/03/2009, -3/+15I must have missed the part where they said the LSE was switching to a Linux-based platform.
- andygavin, on 07/02/2009, -7/+19Was it because they weren't running windows 7?
/s - warp99, on 07/02/2009, -14/+26This speaks volumes. Honestly it woud be cruel and unusual punishment to throw salt into the wounds of the MS apologists, so now I will be humble and silent.
- Rev0lver, on 07/03/2009, -3/+13I'm writing this comment from a Macbook Pro.. My desktop across the room is running Windows, and my computer at work runs Ubuntu. Fanboy? Hardly.
- eadnams, on 07/03/2009, -1/+10depends on the failure.
- smotpoker, on 07/03/2009, -7/+16...of Windows server platforms and MS-devised/derived enterprise solutions*
- reedatschool, on 07/03/2009, -1/+10Almost all mainframes run on Linux, but who cares?
NY stock exchange uses Linux, but who cares?
Most of the Web runs on Linux, but who cares?
Most people are ignorant, but who cares? :)
- Murrabbit, on 07/03/2009, -4/+12Well one thing is for sure: they aren't switching to Mac OSX
- angryfirelord, on 07/03/2009, -2/+10Nah, FreeBSD always beats out linux in high bandwidth situations.
http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/7.0%20Prev ... - inactive, on 07/03/2009, -0/+8In high volume situations, mainframe or midrange systems are the way to go.
- Victawr, on 07/03/2009, -10/+17Maybe because the people running them don't know what the ***** they are doing
$50 says the machine was a mess, and it wasn't window's fault. - dweeb79, on 07/03/2009, -1/+8That was my immediate thought, but after reading the article I can see why. Also keep in mind that OS group would be separate from the consulting group. There are so many reasons for a break down could of occurred.
FTA: TradElect runs on HP ProLiant servers running, in turn, Windows Server 2003. The TradElect software itself is a custom blend of C# and .NET programs, which was created by Microsoft and Accenture, the global consulting firm. On the back-end, it relied on Microsoft SQL Server 2000. Its goal was to maintain sub-ten millisecond response times, real-time system speeds, for stock trades. - rebrad, on 07/03/2009, -8/+15I didn't see anywhere that they would be running on linux or marketprizm; just that the writer liked it. Totally misleading and inaccurate. Buried.
- tribaal, on 07/03/2009, -1/+8Like it says in the article, the bad code in question was written by Microsoft and Accenture.
- warp99, on 07/03/2009, -1/+7If anyone has a problem with the source of the article how about a different source? Maybe the Financial Times of London?
"The LSE appears set to dump TradElect, a share trading system that was upgraded by Accenture, the consultancy, only a year ago."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/38193380-627c-11de-b1c9- ...
Now normally when a project fails it could be for a host of reasons as to why, but this particular failure did not just involve the software coders or the consulting firm Accenture. In fact Microsoft worked hand in glove with Accenture in implementing this solution and proudly displayed this relationship with their "Get the Facts" campaign:
http://www.microsoft.com/uk/getthefacts/lse.mspx
So as you can see the LSE, Accenture, and Microsoft bare full responsibility for the failure by their own statements in the marketing literature Microsoft produced. - blipblopblip, on 07/03/2009, -1/+7There's a very simple reason the UNIX systems work well for these situations - it's because they are modular systems and you don't have to have things like Internet Explorer running when you just want to run one database instance and nothing else. (I'm not claiming specifically that you need Internet Explorer running, I'm just making a point).
- paulsmith288, on 07/03/2009, -1/+7So OS choice has nothing to do with architecture/design/implementation.....right.
- mrBitch, on 07/03/2009, -2/+8Actually, Microsoft was heavily involved in the development, roll-out, and implementation processes for the LSE :
FTA comments section (Bernard) :
http://switch.atdmt.com/action/FY07_Linux_LSE_Down ...
(on MS's own site.)
http://www.microsoft.com/uk/getthefacts/lse.mspx
to wit; page 4:
"In the development, roll-out, and implementation processes, Microsoft worked closely with the London Stock Exchange to ensure not only that they understood their immediate requirements, but that the solution fitted their long-term business plans as specified in the TRM project."
"Robin Paine, Chief Technical Officer at the Exchange, says: “The London Stock Exchange was looking for a responsive partner to engage across all phases of the Technology Roadmap programme. The collaborative approach Microsoft offered made it an ideal choice."
Any more questions on whether Microsoft was "really" involved?
There never was any doubt -- Microsoft was deeply and intimately involved, and bragged about it as loudly as they could.
In fact, it was Microsoft which presented this an issue of Windows and Microsoft "technology" capabilities as compared to Linux -- Ironic, isn't it? - fquednau, on 07/03/2009, -2/+8I am slightly amazed they were trying to set up a system with realtime requirements based on .NET and SQLServer 2000. I am developing with the Microsoft stack since 2001 - and not sure if I would attempt a realtime system with .NET (with many things eating processor time where I don't really have much control - garbage collection, JITter...), and let's face it - SQLServer 2000 was good, but not that good.
- tribaal, on 07/03/2009, -1/+7The program itself was written by Microsoft too... Hence the bashing.
Granted, it was a joint development between Microsoft and Accenture. - cbeach, on 07/03/2009, -1/+6MAN there are a lot of Windows apologists on digg. I call shenanigans
- inactive, on 07/03/2009, -2/+7No, clustering stateless inexpensive systems is the way to go.
- paulsmith288, on 07/03/2009, -1/+6I know. MS has so many marketing droids its unbelievable. Everything they do is great and they never make any mistakes or do anything bad.
- ncgmac, on 07/03/2009, -1/+6Spot on comments around the code. I was sitting here thinking, lets see, you outsourced your development to Accenture, I'm assuming Microsoft assisted with the setup and basic scripting as this is normally how these things work in the financial world of IT. Going with any third party contractor type group is extremely risky, especially when you are coding a system critical to your business.
While I would have chosen Unix/Oracle, or some other backend, to completely blame Microsoft shows how ignorant the author is on the subject he is writing. BTW, I can tell you first hand crap financial programs written by third party consultants. So no, that part of IT is not a Microsoft Monopoly. - NotRylock, on 07/03/2009, -4/+9I like linux too, but so much smugness, it's overwhelming.
- Tubal22, on 07/03/2009, -1/+6Why pay a company $100 a month for terminal services?
- feanix, on 07/03/2009, -2/+7wut
- roflcopters, on 07/03/2009, -1/+6Is it just me, or is Xavier Rolet a freakin' awesome name?
- inactive, on 07/03/2009, -2/+7Well so long as you're happy.
- DarkStar3333, on 07/03/2009, -0/+5When they say Joint development between Microsoft and a Consulting Partner group that just means Microsoft consulting had a few people there to oversee things. Accenture is not know for there code quality but rather rates and ability to get things done quickly, this boils down to the reality that they had hundreds of people working on this project around the world. When you do something fast and cheap the quality will not be good.
Like everything else in the consulting world you have good consultants and bad consultants. A custom blend of C# and .Net programs leads me to believe it was never scoped or developed as an end to end system in the first place.
When you have many teams working on many interconnecting pieces in parallel your bound to his problems. Consulting 101. - soichih, on 07/04/2009, -0/+4I've been working on IT industry for more than a decade now, and all I want to say about Microsoft is that this company has successfully delayed the progress of the entire industry by 10 to 20 years..
- pradaaddict, on 07/03/2009, -0/+4the computers we connect to aren't ours. the service made sense when we were small and we didn't want our own IT infrastructure but still needed somewhere central to keep data and expensive accounting software on so we could all use it. The whole structure of the company is that everyone is a contractor and works from home using their own PC. It results in incredibly low overhead. Now that we're growing it makes more sense to build our own system and I'm in charge of doing it.
- majortom1981, on 07/03/2009, -0/+4GEt off of it i was head of a network for an insurance company and our mission critical servers did just fine running Microsoft windows server.
- discoburgess, on 07/03/2009, -1/+5Yes, thanks for dropping that in. Good to know what you're thinking about your next OS, and what your current OS habits are.
- straps, on 07/03/2009, -1/+5From the "Get The *****" Case Study:
"We selected the Microsoft .NET Framework on the basis of several technical and commercial factors, including real-time performance, agility, integration, and developer productivity." - tribaal, on 07/03/2009, -1/+5The software running on Windows NT servers was *written by microsoft* - that is, the .NET application was a joint development by Microsoft and Accenture...
- discoburgess, on 07/03/2009, -1/+5Yes. Many companies who rely solely on the internet for revenue run Windows servers.
- magus_melchior, on 07/03/2009, -1/+4Here's SJVN's point: Accenture and Microsoft built the system using Windows 2k3, .NET, and SQL Server. In other words, the system, software-wise, was given every possible chance to succeed--nay, excel-- on a primarily Microsoft platform. If you had the developer and supporter of the software packages you're using at your side giving you all the inside tips, wouldn't you expect the final product to be rock-solid?
Unfortunately, this wasn't the case-- it failed to meet its performance targets, and even brought the London stock exchange to a standstill.
Now, it is entirely possible that hardware issues could have been responsible for the low performance and/or the stock exchange freeze. But there are ways to expand hardware capability to eliminate bottlenecks without necessarily sacrificing system stability-- faster processors, more RAM, bigger disks, more network/server redundancy, etc. If the hardware was thoroughly tested and found to be robust, the blame would rightly be shared by Microsoft.
And if the hardware wasn't up to snuff, Microsoft still should bear at least some level of responsibility as co-designer, since there are ways to stress-test a system to anticipate production loads. Allowing a system to perform poorly or even fail in a production environment is patently unacceptable.
And to those of you saying that SJVN is claiming LSE is switching to Linux-- he didn't say that. He does say: "So, might I suggest to the LSE that they consider Linux as the foundation for their next stock software infrastructure?" -
Show 51 - 100 of 148 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is