M$FT hiring--but they need competent people. COMPETENT
raylopez99
engineers. But M$FT only takes good people. So stay unemployed U
lozers.
RL
In the U.S., Microsoft is currently seeking employees in five main
areas: software development engineers, who design complex software;
research software development engineers, who research advanced
software design and theory; software architects, who design large-
scale projects at the highest levels; program managers, who develop
software and lead teams of engineers, and localization software
engineers, who customize software for foreign languages.
7
Corporation:
This Linux Advocacy newsgroup.
Stop posting micoshaft jibberish and drivel here you STUPID FSCK!!
Go install some Linux...
here.. http://www.livecdlist.com, http://www.distrowatch.com
And discuss Linux instead!
Linonut
> BusinessWeek Online had a good article about H1 Visas and software
> engineers. But M$FT only takes good people. So stay unemployed U
> lozers.
Grow up.
![[H]omer's profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjWMQWyYwHeIwxhG3nGUeGWmLQD0R8TeZrvdWDiv5-2S_z3rHg=s40-c)
[H]omer
Really? I heard they only exploit cheap foreign labour, which if you
think about it actually makes sense, because they're only making cheap
quality products.
> Grow up.
Señor Lopez's brain has developed as much as it's going to, I'm afraid.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "[Microsoft] are willing to lose money for years and years just to
| make sure that you don't make any money, either." - Bob Cringely.
| - http://blog.businessofsoftware.org/2007/07/cringely-the-un.html
`----
Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
23:34:36 up 65 days, 22:29, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.06, 0.08
DFS
> Really? I heard they only exploit cheap foreign labour, which if you
> think about it actually makes sense, because they're only making cheap
> quality products.
Best of Breed
==============
MS Visio
MS SQL Server
MS Office
MS Outlook
MS Money
Should be euthanized
=====================
Dia
MySQL
OpenOffice
Evolution
gnucash
Rex Ballard
> BusinessWeek Online had a good article about H1 Visas and software
> engineers.
> But M$FT only takes good people. So stay unemployed U lozers.
> RL
It is a bit of a sad commentary that with 300 million people in this
country, Microsoft can't seem to find qualified people who are willing
to steal - I mean develop - software for Microsoft for a rate that
Microsoft is willing to pay.
Ironically, part of the problem is that people who know windows, only
windows, and nothing but Windows have no clue about how to write
operating system code, because that is all under strict no-disclosure
and not even most Microsoft employees get to see that source code.
The OSS community, especially the Linux and BSD community has a huge
body of people who understand the fundamental concepts of operating
systems, technology, and design, and have been able to experiment
successfully with that design. Microsoft can't even file a patent
without the risk of having some OSS developer claim prior art not
listed in the patent. In most cases, they don't even try to develop
their own, they just buy or steal someones else's, like VMS, OS/2, and
BSD, and claim it as their own.
The OSS has attracted the best and brightest, because they HAVE to be
able to produce original work. Their motivations for doing so vary.
Some are college students who can improve their chances of getting
hired by writing or contributing to OSS projects, others are systems
administrators who work for companies that don't want to market
software, and therefore don't mind if they contribute scripts and
general purpose applications and code to OSS projects. Others are
altruistic, looking to create economic opportunities for others by
offering technology that can be freely distributed to low-income
families, poor people in third-world countries, and young students who
have limited funds and a great deal of curiousity.
In the 1950s and 1960s, automobiles had reached a very sophisticated
state. Young people, some too young to drive, were learning the
principles of mechanics and then creating their own customized
vehicles. These became known as "Hot Rods", "Dune Buggys", or "Funny
Cars", many were only for racing, or for show. Many had customized
suspensions that could raise or lower the car, could get better
performance, more speed, or even better milage out of the cars. One
bright inventor in Texas, looking at the Gas shortage in 1974 (hit the
Southwest Earlier than the rest of the country), even figured out a
way to redesign the fuel and air systems to improve the milage of
older cars. The claim was that he could get 200 MPG. A more reliable
variation was incorporated into fuel injection systems, which replaced
the carburetors, along with computerized ignition, and other
performance features.
The irony is that Detroit wasn't interested in these ideas. They
assumed that people wanted muscle cars, station wagons, and power.
Honda, Toyota, and Datsun (now Nissan) liked the new technology and
licensed several of these patents, and sponsored several others.
Their willingness to take on technology created a huge new market,
which has now grown to be the largest segment of the market.
Meanwhile, Ford, Chrysler, and GM were frantically struggling to
survive, eventually needing special assistance from the government,
protectionist measures, and federally funded research to keep them
from going under.
Microsoft may be in the same boat as Chrysler. Committed to a
technology which was appropriate for a certain phase of the market,
but no longer necessary or even the "best fit" for much of the
market. As a result, in much the same way that Chrysler lost touch
with customers because of their attachment to what "worked last year
and the 5 years before that", Microsoft has relied on the same
strategies of the previous 15 years in a market that no longer needs
most of Microsoft's most strategic products.
Chrysler strugged to redesign itself as German and Asian companies
began to create a huge market of "Economy" cars, designed for budget
minded baby boomers just getting out of college who needed cheap
reliable transportation to and from work. Microsoft may have to
struggle to adapt to "Boom II" children who couldn't afford Windows 95
and loaded Windows instead, kids who could get Windows 3.1 and Windows
9X capable boxes for free, but couldn't get legal Windows licenses,
and opted to try Linux instead.
The result is that there are perhaps hundreds of millions of Linux
users who are now in their mid 20's and early 30's who are now looking
at Linux instead of Windows as their preferred solution - even if they
still currently use Windows to appease the people of their parents'
generation.
> In the U.S., Microsoft is currently seeking employees in five main
> areas: software development engineers, who design complex software;
> research software development engineers, who research advanced
> software design and theory; software architects, who design large-
> scale projects at the highest levels; program managers, who develop
> software and lead teams of engineers, and localization software
> engineers, who customize software for foreign languages.
The problem is that most of the people who have those skills have been
"Infected" by Linux and/or UNIX. Most do not have the "Microsoft
Religeon". Most of those who deal with petabyte databases that have
to do thousands of transactions per second, and need to be available
24/7 99.99% of the time with NO downtime for weekly scheduled
maintenance, find the very prospect of using Windows for such
applications to be about as rediculous as using a Ford Escort to tow a
35 foot boat 50-60 miles to a harbor, or using a Honda Civic to pull a
10 ton trailer.
Windows 2003 has it's place, in the IT infrastructure, but more as a
peripheral or gateway, or as a cache for the data that's on the
reliable *NIX systems.
I frequently use a blend of Windows, Linux, Unix, OSS, and proprietary
products in a large scale solution. On the other hand, I have to add
extra layers of security and overhead to protect the Windows systems
from Windows users. I have to add much more redundancy to make sure
that the Windows systems are available, and I have to structure the
systems so that huge license fees aren't wasted by multi-purpose
Windows servers.
More and more, I'm seeing the role of Windows 2003 servers being
further and further reduced. These days, it's even hard to get
companies to punch holes in their firewalls for ActiveX controls,
administrators have to come in via Citrix instead. On the other hand,
Linux is now competing favorably with AIX and Solaris on mid-sized
applications. For the high-end stuff, it's still AIX, Solaris, or
HP_UX, running on RISC processors, because they have the bandwidth,
efficient memory management, and pipelining to handle 4 gigabytes/
processor/second to get the right information to the right people at
the right time, and make sure that the wrong people never see it.
Rex Ballard
> [H]omer wrote:
> > Really? I heard they only exploit cheap foreign labour, which if you
> > think about it actually makes sense, because they're only making cheap
> > quality products.
>
> Best of Breed
are.
> ==============
> MS Visio
Visio, nice system for general purpose illustrations, but what is the
fundamental business goal?
UML - you'd be better off with Rational Software Archcitect or Star
UML.
CAD? - You'd be better off with Autocad, DanCad, or SPICE - depending
on what you are trying to design.
> MS SQL Server
It depends on what you want to store, how long you want to store it,
how much not having it will cost, and how frequently you need to back
it up.
SQL server is good when you want to pull from a big database like DB2
or Oracle, and then use the SQL Server tables as a cache for the "Big
Iron" tables. This is what Microsoft did with NASDAQ and European
Stock markets. It's not a bad solution. It frees up the big iron to
do the critical work that has to be done right, and lets Microsoft
deliver information that just has to be accurate within a few seconds,
or even a few minutes.
> MS Office
MS Office is a very nice product. It's especially good for people who
have little or no office automation experience. If you have a
secretary who has been typing on an IBM Selectric all these years, and
still uses an adding machine or 4 function calculator, MS-Office is a
huge step up. If they have been doing their presentations using paper
charts drawn using magic markers, or they are still using chalk
boards, MS-Office is a huge step up. What really gives Microsoft the
value in these situations is that Microsoft has lots of little ways of
helping new users learn how to use the computer to do the tasks that
they have been doing manually all these years. When you have a
manager who is till using nails in boards to track his expenses and
recievables, he needs extra "hand holding" even to make the huge LEAP
to Excel Spreadsheets.
> MS Outlook
Outlook is a nice system, and it made it easy for non-technical people
to start using e-mail without having to know what they were doing. Of
course, Outlook has a number of "Features" which make it real easy for
users to give away critical information about bank accounts, financial
history, and other personal information that aids in identity theft,
creation of shell companies, and other forms of fraud, without even
knowing that they are making themselves victims.
Many industries, such as Brokerages, Banks, Insurance Companies, other
regulated industries have to keep a legally accessible archive of all
interactions. In some cases, they are monitored for activities such
as insider trading, bait-and-switch sales tactics, advice that can
lead to class-action lawsuits later on, money laundering, and even
insurance fraud. This is why many of these companies are still using
Lotus Notes instead of Outlook.
> MS Money
MS Money has been cited several times for it's role in a number of
financial frauds. Passport was giving out people's financial
information to the wrong people, viruses were disclosing the spending
habits of users, and small businesses who used Money were even
granting access to creditors and competitors for some of their most
confidential information - without knowing it.
Quicken is much nicer, along with Quickbooks, for smaller businesses.
Larger businesses tend to need solutions that are either customized,
or regulated. This is a market better addressed by SAP, SEIBLE, and
Oracle Financials.
> Should be euthanized
> =====================
> Dia
Dia is one of several diagramming tools available for Linux and in
OSS, and it's not bad for creating a document that an entire team can
review without having to purchase a $500/seat software package. The
$500/seat price may not seem unreasonable, until you start trying to
share the document with 100 people or more. At that point, DIA is a
nice alternative to the "high priced package".
Other applications such as StarUML and some of CAD packages already
available, many ported from Solaris, SCO Unix, UnixWare, and BSD Unix,
will run quite nicely on Linux, and in some cases, are even available
to Windows users with Cygwin.
> MySQL
MySQL is one of several database packages available for Linux. There
are also a number of other "Community Editions" of other products
available. MySQL is often a good solution for solutions similar to
those addressed by SQL Server. It's very fast, it's free, and with
user-friendly tools such as Open Office BASE, it can be very easy to
create input forms, tables, views, and reports, that are quite easily
customized.
MySQL and PostGreSQL are very good ways to get a lot of "Bang For the
Buck" when teamed with other databases such as Oracle, DB2, or Sybase.
> OpenOffice
Open Office isn't the begginner's system that MS Office is. On the
other hand, for most office users, who have already been using an
Office suite such as MS-Office or WordPerfect, or Lotus SmartSuite,
Open Office provides a standard interface, standard documents, and a
standard reviewing tool which can be consistently used across a number
of different platforms and systems. I can review documents on any
machine that runs Java, including cell phones, PDAs, Linux, Solaris,
UnixWare, and AIX boxes if I want, because the source is available and
it runs under standard Java.
An even bigger advantage is an issue that is much more of a concern in
larger organizations. Finding, reviewing, and approving a document
using MS-Office isn't that hard, and works pretty well. Keeping track
of those transictions and alterations and approvals throughout the
life-cycle of the project, and for years thereafter, is a much bigger
problem. Imagine the impact of having, or not having a document 10,
15, or even 20 years later, when the subject of that document has
become a critical factor in a lawsuit.Novell was able to locate a 15
year old document that proved they owned UNIX, and SCO was not able to
find a similar document which they claimed proved that SCO owned UNIX.
When you have 100,000 employees, each making revisions to 8-10
documents per day, having them in a format that simplifies location of
particular kinds of content, and having the ability to track every
revision in a revision control system or document history database,
becomes absolutely critical.
Memos, E-mails, diagrams, spreadsheets, and draft documents can be
critical to the audit trail of a project, especially if there is
contention between one or more of the parties.
For years, the courts used Word Perfect documents for the formal
filings and rulings. Even if the document was composed in Word, the
revisable form was stored in the WordPerfect format which provided the
mark-up and revision history in a pure "text" format, without special
proprietary headers, footers, tokenized structures, and other
restrictions on who could use the documents and what software could be
used to access the documents. Ironically, one of the biggest barriers
to formally logging and archiving documents in Word format was the
Microsoft EULA.
Today, the courts recognize PDF documents as a "Reasonable Facsimile
thereof" of paper documents. The documents can be saved in a form
that can't be easily altered without being detected, it can be
decompressed into a form that can be easily indexed, and can be
"viewed" legally by a number of different applications which can do
anything from providing a graphic rendition or printing a document, to
storing it in a library archive in a manner that is the legal
equivalent to Microfiche or FAX.
MS-Word has no real standing in the legal community. Lawyers will
redline documents in word, but even then, it is often necessary to
cross-check revisions of a document because objectionable portions of
a document may have been "Accepted" to prevent them from being so
closely scrutinized. The worst is when one party or the other drops
in a clause that the attorney for the other party has already insisted
be removed, accepts the change so that it isn't highlighted, then
pushes it to an intermediate manager and says "We're close enough,
sign it or leave". The manager, not noticing that the unacceptable
clause has been reinserted, signs the contract binding his company to
unconcionable terms. You can fire the manager, or make sure he
doesn't sign contracts anymore, but you are still bound by the
"Shotgun Contract". This is a really big problem when the person
signing is in sales, and is so focused on the commission, that he
doesn't even care that he has just signed away not only the profits in
the project, but also all intellectual property rights to TCP/IP as
well.
Excel spreadsheets are often abused, and used inappropriately. This
is one of the reasons why BASE is included with Open Office. Using a
spreadsheet for estimating or forcasting expenses is one thing, trying
to use it as a book-keeping system or customer database is just plain
dangerous. Much safer to create a simple database on a shared server,
and let people make their entries to the shared repository.
Presentations are also abused. If you want to do complex animations,
you should use FLASH, not PowerPoint. If you want to include notes,
attach an MP3 to each slide. If you want to show complex
relationships, use CAD or CASE tools, which will automate the next
stage, don't put the pictures in a "Dumb Slide" format that can't be
transformed into anything else. At least with Presents, the XML
drawings can be transformed into other forms such as UML and CAD
formats using simple filters. With PowerPoint, such a transformation
would be a license violation.
> Evolution
I might even agree with you here. The big problem with both Outlook
and Evolution is that it tries to put too many tools into one basket,
and no standards have been formalized for interacting and transforming
them. Send a calender entry from Outlook to Notes, have the Notes
user sync to his PDA or Cell phone, and then change the meeting time
and place. The confusion can be astonishing.
If you want a public calender, use a public calender, but don't
tightly couple it to my e-mail. One of the biggest abuses of e-mails
is the non-descriptive subject line, the even more generic "Please
review and comment", then the 4 megabyte attachment that has been
broadcast to 20 recipients in the same company, and CC'd to another 50
recipients, and the E-mail administrators are suddenly sending warning
letters because they have a 4 gigabyte jump in mailbox storage (which
expands exponentially as responses are returned), and before long you
have 450,000 people who are spending 1-2 hours/day trying to keep
their e-mail box under 200 megabytes. The alternative is to give
everybody 2-3 gigabytes of storage each (which could easily be filled
in a few months), and try and figure out how to synchronize, archive,
search, store, and support 1500 Tarabytes (1.5 petabytes) and still
have any bandwidth left for other business related activity.
Microsoft had a good idea with Sharepoint, but Linux/Unix/OSS and
Cygwin as well as Windows, has had CVS and Subversion for years, which
can track history, let people share documents, and view revision
history (who changed what and why), and with ODF documents, the
history can be optimized to minimize the storage. This lets one group
of people share a document without having to have a copy in e-mail, a
copy on their hard drive, a copy on the network drive, a copy in the
back-up system, a copy in the e-mail back-up system, and a copy in a
thumb-drive that's 5 revisions out of date but is the "Official"
version.
> gnucash
GNU cash is a trivial simulation of Quicken functionality. If you
have a complex financial picture, you should probably have your
accountant set up the entire system for you, or even better, have him
import your records into your database for you.
A simple "electronic checkbook" is nice, when you only have a single
checking account and a single savings account, and you don't have to
itemize every deduction. When you start looking at different
regulatory agencies, tax agencies, and other complexities, you are
probably going to want a system created and organized by a
professional. He might give you an internal database that you can use
to enter and update your shared information, and you might update it
using QIF or QXF format, but in the long run, he is probably going to
be pouring your information into a system that manages standard coding
and structuring of acconts. These days, there is also the desire to
capture receipts electronically. Better to capture the recipt, and
store it using a BLOB and database entry, than to try and keep
reciepts in a directory of files, keep the financial records
themselves in another database, and try to correlate the two on April
15th.
If you have to itemize your taxes, and you have more than one state to
deal with, then you should be using a professional who can make sure
that things are done in compliance with all of the appropriate laws.
Arguing for MSFT vs Open Office claiming that MSFT is the "Best of
Breed" is actually a bit absurd. MS-Office is a knock-off of far
superior products who have been starved out of the marketplace by
Microsoft's bundling and lock-out tactics - even in direct defiance of
existing and previous court orders.
If I showed you Applix Asterix, Lotus Notes for Solaris, and some of
the other top-of-the line spreadsheets available for SCO Unix,
Interactive Unix, and Sun Unix at the time that Microsoft first began
locking out competitors through their use of Bundling, Quotas, and
Minimum Commitments, there is no way in the world you would have
chosen the Microsoft product over the competitor product.
If I showed you FrameMaker, Word Perfect for Unix, or some of the
other Word Processing packages available when Windows 3.1 was first
released, there is no way you would have chosen Word.
If I showed you UNIX CAD, CASE, and CAD/CAM technology available when
Powerpoint was first released, you would think PowerPoint was a toy.
Even Corel Draw for the other platforms could run circles around PP.
And there was Windows itself. When Microsoft first released Windows
NT 3.1, there were already 32 bit versions of Solaris, AIX, BSD,
Linux, SCO Unix, and UnixWare. All of which could run weeks or months
without rebooting. The last major virus outbreak on a *Nix system was
the "Morris Worm" in 1987, and that "back door" resulted in locking
down *Nix systems to levels that often exceed DOD standards. In fact,
for a few years, the NSA was concerned because Linux and Unix were
"Too Secure", preventing Intelligence and Law Enforcement agencies
from monitoring criminal activities even with a court order. Special
accomodations had to be created to provide compliance with such court
orders.
Calling Microsoft "best of breed" is really funny.
Au79
> BusinessWeek Online had a good article about H1 Visas and software
> engineers. But M$FT only takes good people. So stay unemployed U
> lozers.
>
Right, you dim-witted retard.
> RL
>
> In the U.S., Microsoft is currently seeking employees in five main
> areas: software development engineers, who design complex software;
> research software development engineers, who research advanced
> software design and theory; software architects, who design large-
> scale projects at the highest levels; program managers, who develop
> software and lead teams of engineers, and localization software
> engineers, who customize software for foreign languages.
And only to develop crappy software that will require huge amounts of
third-party software to keep it half-way safe and somewhat useable.
If anything, Symantec, McAfee, CA, and Kaspersky are the ones who have the
"good" people.
--
....................
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html
DFS
> On Oct 13, 6:55 pm, "DFS" <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
>> [H]omer wrote:
>>> Really? I heard they only exploit cheap foreign labour, which if you
>>> think about it actually makes sense, because they're only making
>>> cheap quality products.
>>
>> Best of Breed
> Best of breed is really a function of what your business objectives
> are.
>
>> ==============
>> MS Visio
> Visio, nice system for general purpose illustrations, but what is the
> fundamental business goal?
Visualization: flow charts, networks, timelines, org charts, business
processes, etc.
> UML - you'd be better off with Rational Software Archcitect or Star
> UML.
> CAD? - You'd be better off with Autocad, DanCad, or SPICE - depending
> on what you are trying to design.
Visio isn't a UML or CAD tool. Why are you bringing those up?
>> MS SQL Server
> It depends on what you want to store, how long you want to store it,
> how much not having it will cost, and how frequently you need to back
> it up.
What, will Oracle or DB2 store data that SQL Server won't, and for longer
times, and for less cost, and can't be backed up as frequently?
Answer to all 4: No
> SQL server is good when you want to pull from a big database like DB2
> or Oracle, and then use the SQL Server tables as a cache for the "Big
> Iron" tables. This is what Microsoft did with NASDAQ and European
> Stock markets. It's not a bad solution. It frees up the big iron to
> do the critical work that has to be done right, and lets Microsoft
> deliver information that just has to be accurate within a few seconds,
> or even a few minutes.
London Stock Exchange Becomes World’s Fastest with HP and Microsoft [SQL
Server 2000] Technology
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2006/060712xa.html
SQL Server 2005 holds the Top 3 of 3 performance spots at
http://www.tpc.org/tpce/tpce_perf_results.asp
>> MS Office
>
> MS Office is a very nice product.
No fair telling the truth and shocking me. Remember - you're Rex Ballard;
you have a reputation as a fantasist and a liar to protect.
> It's especially good for people who
> have little or no office automation experience. If you have a
> secretary who has been typing on an IBM Selectric all these years, and
> still uses an adding machine or 4 function calculator, MS-Office is a
> huge step up.
ho hum. If you come back in 6 months and read your own cola posts, you'll
understand why you're not taken seriously.
>> MS Outlook
>
> Outlook is a nice system, and it made it easy for non-technical people
> to start using e-mail without having to know what they were doing.
What, you're supposed to memorize the SMTP RFC 821 before sending an email?
> Of
> course, Outlook has a number of "Features" which make it real easy for
> users to give away critical information about bank accounts, financial
> history, and other personal information that aids in identity theft,
> creation of shell companies, and other forms of fraud, without even
> knowing that they are making themselves victims.
Funny how I've been online for 11 years - using only Outlook Express - and
all my money is intact.
> This is why many of these companies are still using
> Lotus Notes instead of Outlook.
uh huh. All 127 of them.
>> MS Money
>
> MS Money has been cited several times for it's role in a number of
> financial frauds. Passport was giving out people's financial
> information to the wrong people, viruses were disclosing the spending
> habits of users, and small businesses who used Money were even
> granting access to creditors and competitors for some of their most
> confidential information - without knowing it.
>
> Quicken is much nicer,
Depends on who you ask.
> along with Quickbooks, for smaller businesses.
> Larger businesses tend to need solutions that are either customized,
> or regulated. This is a market better addressed by SAP, SEIBLE, and
> Oracle Financials.
Again with the topic shifting?
>> Should be euthanized
>> =====================
>
>> Dia
> Dia is one of several diagramming tools available for Linux and in
> OSS, and it's not bad for creating a document that an entire team can
> review without having to purchase a $500/seat software package. The
> $500/seat price may not seem unreasonable,
But your exaggeration of 2x to 4x the real price is unreasonable.
> until you start trying to
> share the document with 100 people or more. At that point, DIA is a
> nice alternative to the "high priced package".
free Visio Viewer 2007:
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Office-tools/Other-Office-Tools/Microsoft-Visio-Viewer.shtml
>> MySQL
>
> MySQL is one of several database packages available for Linux.
The worst one, not counting SQLite and OO Base.
> There
> are also a number of other "Community Editions" of other products
> available. MySQL is often a good solution for solutions similar to
> those addressed by SQL Server. It's very fast, it's free, and with
> user-friendly tools such as Open Office BASE, it can be very easy to
> create input forms, tables, views, and reports, that are quite easily
> customized.
Sorry friend, but OO Base is far, far from user friendly and easily
customized. It's report and form writers stink to high heaven, and it's
overall functionality is a distant 2nd to MS Access.
>> OpenOffice
>
> Open Office isn't the begginner's system that MS Office is. On the
> other hand, for most office users, who have already been using an
> Office suite such as MS-Office or WordPerfect, or Lotus SmartSuite,
> Open Office provides a standard interface, standard documents, and a
> standard reviewing tool which can be consistently used across a number
> of different platforms and systems. I can review documents on any
> machine that runs Java, including cell phones, PDAs, Linux, Solaris,
> UnixWare, and AIX boxes if I want, because the source is available and
> it runs under standard Java.
I don't know what you're trying to say, but OpenOffice is not a Java
program.
> An even bigger advantage is an issue that is much more of a concern in
> larger organizations. Finding, reviewing, and approving a document
> using MS-Office isn't that hard, and works pretty well. Keeping track
> of those transictions and alterations and approvals throughout the
> life-cycle of the project, and for years thereafter, is a much bigger
> problem. Imagine the impact of having, or not having a document 10,
> 15, or even 20 years later, when the subject of that document has
> become a critical factor in a lawsuit.
>
> Novell was able to locate a 15
> year old document that proved they owned UNIX, and SCO was not able to
> find a similar document which they claimed proved that SCO owned UNIX.
>
> When you have 100,000 employees, each making revisions to 8-10
> documents per day, having them in a format that simplifies location of
> particular kinds of content, and having the ability to track every
> revision in a revision control system or document history database,
> becomes absolutely critical.
There is no organization on the planet that enforces document revision
tracking upon its 100,000 employees.
> Memos, E-mails, diagrams, spreadsheets, and draft documents can be
> critical to the audit trail of a project, especially if there is
> contention between one or more of the parties.
And IBM and you have been using MS Office for basically all your project
mgmt and work product documents for years.
> For years, the courts used Word Perfect documents for the formal
> filings and rulings. Even if the document was composed in Word, the
> revisable form was stored in the WordPerfect format which provided the
> mark-up and revision history in a pure "text" format, without special
> proprietary headers, footers, tokenized structures, and other
> restrictions on who could use the documents and what software could be
> used to access the documents. Ironically, one of the biggest barriers
> to formally logging and archiving documents in Word format was the
> Microsoft EULA.
>
> Today, the courts recognize PDF documents as a "Reasonable Facsimile
> thereof" of paper documents. The documents can be saved in a form
> that can't be easily altered without being detected, it can be
> decompressed into a form that can be easily indexed, and can be
> "viewed" legally by a number of different applications which can do
> anything from providing a graphic rendition or printing a document, to
> storing it in a library archive in a manner that is the legal
> equivalent to Microfiche or FAX.
>
> MS-Word has no real standing in the legal community.
Whatever that means.
> Lawyers will
> redline documents in word, but even then, it is often necessary to
> cross-check revisions of a document because objectionable portions of
> a document may have been "Accepted" to prevent them from being so
> closely scrutinized. The worst is when one party or the other drops
> in a clause that the attorney for the other party has already insisted
> be removed, accepts the change so that it isn't highlighted, then
> pushes it to an intermediate manager and says "We're close enough,
> sign it or leave". The manager, not noticing that the unacceptable
> clause has been reinserted, signs the contract binding his company to
> unconcionable terms. You can fire the manager, or make sure he
> doesn't sign contracts anymore, but you are still bound by the
> "Shotgun Contract". This is a really big problem when the person
> signing is in sales, and is so focused on the commission, that he
> doesn't even care that he has just signed away not only the profits in
> the project, but also all intellectual property rights to TCP/IP as
> well.
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah
The topic I responded to was [H]omer's ludicrous claim that MS makes cheap
quality products. Though I can relate to your office-software discussions,
in general your posts would be much more useful if you stayed on-topic.
> Excel spreadsheets are often abused, and used inappropriately.
What does that have to do with MS or Office? Why do you bring it up?
> This is one of the reasons why BASE is included with Open Office.
Base is included w/ OpenOffice because they had no chance of competing with
MS Office, but with Base included they're in a better position, and now they
have little to no chance.
>> Evolution
>
> Send a calender entry from Outlook to Notes, have the Notes
> user sync to his PDA or Cell phone, and then change the meeting time
> and place. The confusion can be astonishing.
>
> ...and before long you
> have 450,000 people who are spending 1-2 hours/day trying to keep
> their e-mail box under 200 megabytes.
Your work life, not to mention your imagination, is just so dramatic.
I spend about 5 minutes a day organizing emails. Occasionally I'll get a
full box warning, and I just move a few with attachments to a local archive
folder, or delete them.
>> gnucash
>
> GNU cash is a trivial simulation of Quicken functionality.
There you go again, telling the truth. It's disconcerting.
> Arguing for MSFT vs Open Office claiming that MSFT is the "Best of
> Breed" is actually a bit absurd. MS-Office is a knock-off of far
> superior products who have been starved out of the marketplace by
> Microsoft's bundling and lock-out tactics - even in direct defiance of
> existing and previous court orders.
Like hell.
> If I showed you Applix Asterix, Lotus Notes for Solaris, and some of
> the other top-of-the line spreadsheets available for SCO Unix,
> Interactive Unix, and Sun Unix at the time that Microsoft first began
> locking out competitors through their use of Bundling, Quotas, and
> Minimum Commitments, there is no way in the world you would have
> chosen the Microsoft product over the competitor product.
I started using Excel in the 1992-3 time frame, and it was [at least
marginally] better then than the competition: Lotus 1-2-3 for Windows and
Borland Quattro Pro. Nowadays Excel 2007 just makes OO Calc look silly.
> If I showed you FrameMaker, Word Perfect for Unix, or some of the
> other Word Processing packages available when Windows 3.1 was first
> released, there is no way you would have chosen Word.
>
> If I showed you UNIX CAD, CASE, and CAD/CAM technology available when
> Powerpoint was first released, you would think PowerPoint was a toy.
> Even Corel Draw for the other platforms could run circles around PP.
Rex reliving his "glory days" of 16 years ago. Why do so many "advocates"
live in the past?
> And there was Windows itself. When Microsoft first released Windows
> NT 3.1, there were already 32 bit versions of Solaris, AIX, BSD,
> Linux, SCO Unix, and UnixWare.
All extremely expensive, or in the case of Linux, immature.
> All of which could run weeks or months
> without rebooting. The last major virus outbreak on a *Nix system was
> the "Morris Worm" in 1987, and that "back door" resulted in locking
> down *Nix systems to levels that often exceed DOD standards.
> In fact,
> for a few years, the NSA was concerned because Linux and Unix were
> "Too Secure", preventing Intelligence and Law Enforcement agencies
> from monitoring criminal activities even with a court order. Special
> accomodations had to be created to provide compliance with such court
> orders.
hmmm... I didn't know Linux and Unix have been spyware tools for the Feds
for such a long time. I'll have to keep that in mind.
> Calling Microsoft "best of breed" is really funny.
I didn't call MS best of breed.
Upon reflection I was overdoing it to include SQL Server (as a whole) as a
"best of breed" product. While it's admin and analysis tools are the best,
and a better value than Oracle, and a better price-performer, I'd say Oracle
is truly best of breed for an enterprise RDMBS.
[H]omer
[snip huge rebuttal to DooFy's typical gibberish]
> Calling Microsoft "best of breed" is really funny.
In particular, I thought including Outlook in the "best of breed"
category was hilarious.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "[Microsoft] are willing to lose money for years and years just to
| make sure that you don't make any money, either." - Bob Cringely.
| - http://blog.businessofsoftware.org/2007/07/cringely-the-un.html
`----
Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
05:59:58 up 66 days, 4:54, 3 users, load average: 0.13, 0.32, 0.55
7
> [H]omer wrote:
>
>> Really? I heard they only exploit cheap foreign labour, which if you
>> think about it actually makes sense, because they're only making cheap
>> quality products.
>
>
> Best of Breed
> ==============
> MS Visio
> MS SQL Server
> MS Office
> MS Outlook
> MS Money
Stop promoting micoshaft products in a Linux advocacy group you twat!
> Should be euthanized
> =====================
> Dia
> MySQL
> OpenOffice
> Evolution
> gnucash
And stop posting disparaging posts about Linux and open source
applications on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation.
Asstroturfing is one thing, but trying to aspire to be a windummy
promoting windummy stuff for Micoshaft is a no no.
Here look try installing some Linux and then tell us
about your Linux education and experiences.
raylopez99
> On Oct 13, 5:13 pm, raylopez99 <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > BusinessWeek Online had a good article about H1 Visas and software
> > engineers.
> > But M$FT only takes good people. So stay unemployed U lozers.
> > RL
>
> It is a bit of a sad commentary that with 300 million people in this
> country, Microsoft can't seem to find qualified people who are willing
> to steal - I mean develop - software for Microsoft for a rate that
> Microsoft is willing to pay.
You meant steal. You're outed as a MSFT hater masquarading as a
neutral advocate.
> The OSS has attracted the best and brightest, because they HAVE to be
> able to produce original work. Their motivations for doing so vary.
Yeah, and monkeys typing randomly are as good as Shakespeare. Right.
> In the 1950s and 1960s, automobiles had reached a very sophisticated
> state. Young people, some too young to drive, were learning the
> principles of mechanics and then creating their own customized
> vehicles. These became known as "Hot Rods", "Dune Buggys", or "Funny
> Cars", many were only for racing, or for show. Many had customized
> suspensions that could raise or lower the car, could get better
> performance, more speed, or even better milage out of the cars. One
> bright inventor in Texas, looking at the Gas shortage in 1974 (hit the
> Southwest Earlier than the rest of the country), even figured out a
> way to redesign the fuel and air systems to improve the milage of
> older cars. The claim was that he could get 200 MPG. A more reliable
> variation was incorporated into fuel injection systems, which replaced
> the carburetors, along with computerized ignition, and other
> performance features.
What a confused analogy. First muscle cars then fuel efficiency.
Later you mention Chrysler as a stagnant company, when in fact of the
Big Three they were the most innovative. Ford or GM would have been
better picks to make your point.
>
> > In the U.S., Microsoft is currently seeking employees in five main
> > areas: software development engineers, who design complex software;
> > research software development engineers, who research advanced
> > software design and theory; software architects, who design large-
> > scale projects at the highest levels; program managers, who develop
> > software and lead teams of engineers, and localization software
> > engineers, who customize software for foreign languages.
>
> The problem is that most of the people who have those skills have been
> "Infected" by Linux and/or UNIX. Most do not have the "Microsoft
> Religeon".
You're right in a way: if you learn MS programming (Visual Studio)
you don't want to go back to more primitive forms. I program, so I
know.
> Windows 2003 has it's place, in the IT infrastructure, but more as a
> peripheral or gateway, or as a cache for the data that's on the
> reliable *NIX systems.
>
OK, OK. we get it. Apache rules (for now, though MSFT is making
inroads, and we'll see in five years time).
RL
raylopez99
>
What a brilliant post DFS! I was going to respond to the prolix Mr.
Ballard, who, like a certain John Fernbach in alt.global.warming,
seems to be way too verbose, but you nailed it with your riposte.
One small comment, since I code for a hobby and work with SQL Server
Express (which is free and great for learning):
> Upon reflection I was overdoing it to include SQL Server (as a whole) as a
> "best of breed" product. While it's admin and analysis tools are the best,
> and a better value than Oracle, and a better price-performer, I'd say Oracle
> is truly best of breed for an enterprise RDMBS.
Truly Oracle is probably technically slightly superior (not much from
what I've read), especially for pitabyte storage, but SQL IMO is
better value (cheaper and about as good). And SQL Server Express
(free) cannot be beat.
RL
raylopez99
engineers. But M$FT only takes good people. So stay unemployed U
lozers.
RL
In the U.S., Microsoft is currently seeking employees in five main
DFS
Try SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition ($45). It's the Enterprise Edition
with a test/develop license. Great software.
DFS
> Verily I say unto thee, that Rex Ballard spake thusly:
>
> [snip huge rebuttal to DooFy's typical gibberish]
>
>> Calling Microsoft "best of breed" is really funny.
>
> In particular, I thought including Outlook in the "best of breed"
> category was hilarious.
What's better?
DFS
> Stop promoting micoshaft products in a Linux advocacy group you twat!
Why aren't you interested in the best software?
> And stop posting disparaging posts about Linux and open source
> applications on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation.
I don't do any cola posting on behalf of anyone or anything but myself. MS
as a software juggernaut is interesting to study and discuss, but I
generally couldn't care less about them. I like and use a few of their
excellent products, but I feel they haven't treated their customers
particularly well for a few years now (based on trying to get tech support
from them). I don't and never have worked for them, nor has anyone I know.
> Asstroturfing is one thing, but trying to aspire to be a windummy
> promoting windummy stuff for Micoshaft is a no no.
Zip it, net nanny.
> Here look try installing some Linux and then tell us
> about your Linux education and experiences.
>
> http://www.livecdlist.com
> http://www.distrowatch.com
I've installed a dozen distros. It's not a happy story.
Kier
> 7 wrote:
>> Here look try installing some Linux and then tell us
>> about your Linux education and experiences.
>>
>> http://www.livecdlist.com
>> http://www.distrowatch.com
>
> I've installed a dozen distros. It's not a happy story.
Funny thing, that. Whenever a Linux advocate says they've had problems
with Windows, you call them a liar. So why should anyone believe your
whines about your Linux installs?
I've just installed the latest Mandriva on the old FrankenPC, after a long
period of absence from the distro. The only thing not working is 3D, and
that's down to hardware (I think the graphics card is really too powerful
for the box its in). SLED and openSUSE are working well on my newer dsktop
and laptop, PCLOS works on my old laptop.
I rarely get crashed apps or have any significant problems.
--
Kier
Peter Köhlmann
Everything
--
The Day Microsoft makes something that does not suck is probably
the day they start making vacuum cleaners.
7
> 7 wrote:
>
>> Stop promoting micoshaft products in a Linux advocacy group you twat!
>
> Why aren't you interested in the best software?
Stop promoting Windummy software in COLA. Its against the charter.
We are not interested in bad software shipped by micoshaft without
the source code.
>> And stop posting disparaging posts about Linux and open source
>> applications on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation.
>
> I don't do any cola posting on behalf of anyone or anything but myself.
Very hard to believe. Somebody has to employ you for all the time
and energy you waste dripping micoshaft effluent on to the COLA newsgroups.
> MS as a software juggernaut
Actually, thats a lie. Open source in EU is as big as Micoshaft Corporation.
Open source is the bigger juggernaut and you should be promoting open source
if you are reduced to logic.
> is interesting to study and discuss, but I
> generally couldn't care less about them. I like and use a few of their
> excellent products,
They are not excellent. There is no source code and meritocracy that goes
with it to produce excellent code.
> but I feel they haven't treated their customers
> particularly well for a few years now (based on trying to get tech support
> from them). I don't and never have worked for them, nor has anyone I
> know.
Working on their behalf is what you are consistently failing to deny.
We all know micoshaft corporation works by employing proxies to avoid
litigation. The laws in EU does not allow you to work like that, hence
you don't see many asstroturfers - at least not for very long - only merkins
are asstroturfing.
>> Asstroturfing is one thing, but trying to aspire to be a windummy
>> promoting windummy stuff for Micoshaft is a no no.
>
> Zip it, net nanny.
No - thats you violating the COLA charter. Its you who need to find
alternative newsgroups to promote your love of micoshaft products.
You won't find it here me thinks.
>> Here look try installing some Linux and then tell us
>> about your Linux education and experiences.
>>
>> http://www.livecdlist.com
>> http://www.distrowatch.com
>
> I've installed a dozen distros. It's not a happy story.
Thats you - but me nearly all the things I have ever done are 100% working
unlike the windummy experience. Its just not up to standards anymore.
I'm working on image recognition test rig - and boy that is just
stupendously wonderful - just found camgrab for example and taking photos
with webcam with command line.
I can load those images into little boxes with Gambas with just a line of
code. I'm hunting for image processing utilities now - and I'm sure there
are many candidates out there to help me out.
With windummy software, its a non-starter because of licensing issues.
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
raylopez99 wrote:
> On Oct 13, 10:01 pm, "DFS" <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
> >
>
> What a brilliant post DFS! I was going to respond to the prolix Mr.
> Ballard, who, like a certain John Fernbach in alt.global.warming,
> seems to be way too verbose, but you nailed it with your riposte.
Be sure to wipe your chin when you're done.
Linonut
Welcome to the wonderful wide application world of DFS.
Best of breed? Only if you think Windows is a Microsoft-only platform.
How about some quality posting for a change, DFS?
--
Tux rox!
Linonut
Just about anything. Frankly, I find using mutt as a mail client, with
some daemons to handle other tasks, to be faster and easier than
Outlook.
But that's just me.
--
Tux rox!
DFS
> After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> [H]omer wrote:
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Rex Ballard spake thusly:
>>>
>>> [snip huge rebuttal to DooFy's typical gibberish]
>>>
>>>> Calling Microsoft "best of breed" is really funny.
>>>
>>> In particular, I thought including Outlook in the "best of breed"
>>> category was hilarious.
>>
>> What's better?
>
> Just about anything.
Yawn.
> Frankly, I find using mutt as a mail client,
> with some daemons to handle other tasks, to be faster and easier than
> Outlook.
What do "daemons" have to do with anything?
How do you manage your calendar and schedule appointments and verify the
attendees are available in mutt?
> But that's just me.
Well, you and a few others.
DFS
I corrected the SQL Server item - Oracle is better.
> How about some quality posting for a change, DFS?
That's as good as it gets. [H]omer the [P]roprietary [H]ypocrite says MS
makes cheap quality products, so I list a few of their excellent products
(and the corresponding dreck in the OSS world). What more do you want?
Mark Kent
Best of breed is great for dogs and horses. Here, we're talking about
engineering and software, which is measurable in many ways. Like, for
example, licence cost, ease of customisation, number of supported
platforms, openness of storage formats, etc.
I'll be sure to consider Microsoft next time I go to the races, though.
--
| Mark Kent -- 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/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
chrisv
>How about some quality posting for a change, DFS?
Why bother, when worthless trolls gets him fed?
Linonut
> Linonut wrote:
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>
>>> Best of Breed
>>> ==============
>>> MS Visio
>>> MS SQL Server
>>> MS Office
>>> MS Outlook
>>> MS Money
>>>
>>>
>>> Should be euthanized
>>> =====================
>>> Dia
>>> MySQL
>>> OpenOffice
>>> Evolution
>>> gnucash
>>
>
> That's as good as it gets. [H]omer the [P]roprietary [H]ypocrite says MS
> makes cheap quality products, so I list a few of their excellent products
> (and the corresponding dreck in the OSS world). What more do you want?
As far as I know, none of the OSS projects listed are dreck. Not even
Dia.
Dia has some clumsy parts, but in many ways it is /easier/ to use than
Visio. And DIA is not constrained by your paper size.
The main difference between Dia and Visio is that Visio aims for
diagrams that fit into a Word document, while Dia aims for diagrams that
are blueprint sized.
As far as the rest of the apps, I simply chalk up your judgment to
severe bias or desire to ridicule people and piss off the locals.
--
Tux rox!
Linonut
> Linonut <lin...@be11south.net> espoused:
>
>> Best of breed? Only if you think Windows is a Microsoft-only platform.
>>
>> How about some quality posting for a change, DFS?
>
> Best of breed is great for dogs and horses. Here, we're talking about
> engineering and software, which is measurable in many ways. Like, for
> example, licence cost, ease of customisation, number of supported
> platforms, openness of storage formats, etc.
>
> I'll be sure to consider Microsoft next time I go to the races, though.
Well, Microsoft /is/ good at given you the run-around.
--
Tux rox!
Linonut
> Linonut wrote:
>
>>How about some quality posting for a change, DFS?
>
> Why bother, when worthless trolls gets him fed?
You have a point, but I'll keep at it for awhile yet.
--
Tux rox!
Linonut
> How do you manage your calendar and schedule appointments and verify the
> attendees are available in mutt?
You don't. You pipe the data to applications more suited to that
purpose.
At work, though, I have to use either Outlook or web-mail. Both are
generally painfully sluggish.
Moving through emails with mutt is a breeze, but corporate simply won't
support SMTP/POP mail.
--
Tux rox!
BearItAll
It must be Bill's job, what with him leaving and all. I'll take it.
Now then, what can I spend my 50 billion pay cheque on, other than a
yaught, I think I might buy island, for weekend retreats.
Rex Ballard
> Rex Ballard wrote:
> > On Oct 13, 6:55 pm, "DFS" <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
> >> Best of Breed
> > Best of breed is really a function of what your business objectives
> > are.
>
> >> ==============
> >> MS Visio
> > Visio, nice system for general purpose illustrations, but what is the
> > fundamental business goal?
>
> Visualization: flow charts, networks, timelines, org charts, business
> processes, etc.
One tool for doing all of that. And you think that's "best of breed".
> > UML - you'd be better off with Rational Software Archcitect or Star UML.
> > CAD? - You'd be better off with Autocad, DanCad, or SPICE - depending
> > on what you are trying to design.
>
> Visio isn't a UML or CAD tool. Why are you bringing those up?
Visio is a generic "general purpose" tool, sort of like a Swiss Army
Knife for drawings.
It has some CAD-like functions, some CASE-like functions, and some
other features found
on other
The problem with your argument, that Visio is "Best of Breed" is that
you haven't defined WHAT breed it is. In your response, you have
pretty much described a Mutt - a Mutt can't really be best of breed
now, can it?
> Visualization:
Nice generic term.
> flow charts,
You mean like UML Activity diagrams. The big difference being that a
Visio flow chart has to be converted into code manually by a human
being who must convert the diagram into something that can be
implemented, then add reliability, exception handling,
transformations, load management, monitoring, and other support
features - 2 hours drawing a picture in Visio, 2000 hours turning that
picture into a functional system. Use a good BPEL engine from IBM,
Oracle, or BEA, and you can draw the picture which is automatically
compiled into functional code. UML CASE tools would also turn that
chart into real code.
> networks,
Probably better to use a specialized tool that can automatically map
out the entire network, or generate the RARP or DHCP assignments
required to configure the router and nodes automatically.
> timelines,
Best of breed would be closer to MS-Project. There are better project
management tools and planning tools available, that provide better
control of how things are scheduled. Things like making sure that you
keep resources optimally deployed, without having to do everything by
hand. The "Leveling" on Project is so broken that most Project
Managers consider it a liability to the product. The business rules
used for leveling are broken, incomplete or just disfunctional.
> org charts,
Might want to get a good LDAP manager. Those systems will not only
store their names, addresses, pictures, and other hierarchy
information, but also manage passwords and access control across a
multi-business network to network. A good commercial package for this
is Tivoli Identity Manager. Novell also makes a great package, as
does Oracle. At IBM, we have an org chart that can map 450,000
employees.
> business processes
Get a good BPEL engine, there are good commercial and OSS
implementations available. Then you drawing becomes executable code
that can be implemented on the engine.
>, etc.
Seems like most people who want a more general purpose drawing tool go
with PowerPoint on Windows and Open Office Presents as an OSS
solution.
> >> MS SQL Server
> > It depends on what you want to store, how long you want to store it,
> > how much not having it will cost, and how frequently you need to back
> > it up.
>
> What, will Oracle or DB2 store data that SQL Server won't, and for longer
> times, and for less cost, and can't be backed up as frequently?
>
> Answer to all 4: No
DB2 and Oracle can scale to much larger Linux, Unix, and even
Mainframe systems, with capacities in petabytes. Which SQL Servers do
you know of that perform 5,000 transactions per second, on 2 petabytes
of databases, with 99.99% uptime - on the same system?
Oracle is used by NASDAQ for the trading floor, and DB2 is used by the
banks and credit card companies..
> > SQL server is good when you want to pull from a big database like DB2
> > or Oracle, and then use the SQL Server tables as a cache for the "Big
> > Iron" tables. This is what Microsoft did with NASDAQ and European
> > Stock markets. It's not a bad solution. It frees up the big iron to
> > do the critical work that has to be done right, and lets Microsoft
> > deliver information that just has to be accurate within a few seconds,
> > or even a few minutes.
>
> London Stock Exchange Becomes World's Fastest with HP and Microsoft [SQL
> Server 2000] Technologyhttp://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2006/060712xa.html
Dig a little deeper, beyond the headlines. The system broadcasts
quotes to online users. It's very similar to the solution used on the
NASDAQ system since 2000. The actual trading database is based on
Oracle, but the quotes are transferred into SQL servers - in the
London Stock Exchange, around 100 proliant servers, where they can be
queried. Since the tables are relatively small, the delays are
tolerable, and trading is not only not impacted, but the trading
system is protected from quotes traffic, it's an appropriate use of
SQL server. If the server crashes, you can reboot it, reload the
tables, and be back in running in less than 15 minutes.
I might point out that it is theoretically possible to do the same
thing with PostGreSQL or MySQL and probably at lower cost. Microsoft
and HP were willing to provide the 24/7 support (even though most of
the activity is during the business day in London), and box-booters
for the hardware and software. There are companies who are willing to
support PostgreSQL and MySQL, but not too many of them would be
willing to assume the liability of a market crash due to failure of
the quotes system.
> SQL Server 2005 holds the Top 3 of 3 performance spots athttp://www.tpc.org/tpce/tpce_perf_results.asp
> >> MS Office
> > MS Office is a very nice product.
>
> No fair telling the truth and shocking me.
> Remember - you're Rex Ballard;
> you have a reputation as a fantasist and a liar to protect.
Since you are being nasty, I'm not going to respond to the rest :-P
[H]omer
> After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> How do you manage your calendar and schedule appointments and
>> verify the attendees are available in mutt?
>
> You don't. You pipe the data to applications more suited to that
> purpose.
Such as Mozilla Sunbird.
Or if you need integration, use Thunderbird with its Lightning extension
(essentially the same as Sunbird, only integrated):
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/
Then again, businesses would be more likely to run a full CRM, such as
SugarCRM:
http://www.sugarforge.org/content/open-source/
> At work, though, I have to use either Outlook or web-mail. Both are
> generally painfully sluggish.
>
> Moving through emails with mutt is a breeze, but corporate simply
> won't support SMTP/POP mail.
Then they're dinosaurs ... like Outlook and Exchange.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "[Microsoft] are willing to lose money for years and years just to
| make sure that you don't make any money, either." - Bob Cringely.
| - http://blog.businessofsoftware.org/2007/07/cringely-the-un.html
`----
Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
21:15:28 up 67 days, 20:10, 1 user, load average: 0.50, 0.40, 0.18
[H]omer
> I'll be sure to consider Microsoft next time I go to the races,
> though.
Microsoft software and horses have another thing in common ... by the
time the owners are finished with them, they both end up as dog food.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "[Microsoft] are willing to lose money for years and years just to
| make sure that you don't make any money, either." - Bob Cringely.
| - http://blog.businessofsoftware.org/2007/07/cringely-the-un.html
`----
Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
21:20:28 up 67 days, 20:15, 1 user, load average: 0.12, 0.26, 0.18