Slashdot Mirror

Intel provides an Itanium reference board that makes it possible for other manufacturers to release OEM Itanium based systems. As a second manufacturer example, I've used on of Bull's Novascale Bullion servers. It wasn't very cost effective, but it did include 256 cores, and continued running just fine when one socket was damaged during shipping. The sort of applications that need that many cores and heavy redundancy against hardware failures exist, and no commodity hardware will satisfy them. There's just only a few hundred thousand of such systems sold each year.

I beg your pardon! Would not the name of a super-analytical engine be quite appropriate here?

The mechanism you've just described is used by the Bull Trusway PPS key. There is still a few differences. First, there is a single wheel so you have to enter the PIN code digit by digit. Second, it does not use a battery: you have to plug it in first. However the data is accessible only if the PIN is entered correctly.

The only drawback is that it is not really something you can buy "off the shelf."

I'm sorry, but iBull has been closed down after a cease-and-desist letter from Groupe Bull

There's really only one way.

Build it yourself. Hardware and software. It kind of explains Bull.

While an improved Babelfish may improve our mutual comprehension, please pause for a moment to consider all the linguistic hilarity we'll forever lose.

Yeah, like me going to work for Bull in 1997, and searching for "comment dit-on, le, fuck, le chose sur lequel on tappe, thingy qui connecte a l'ordinateur, ah yeah, le clavier". French Bull dude: "ah, le keyboard."

Hilarity indeed.

I used to work for a corporation called Bull, a French computer manufacturer and consulting outfit.

One of that company's core products at the time was smartcard-based . The project they were really proud of consisted of a massive rollout for a chain of hospitals in France, where doctors and other staff, just by inserting a chip card into a reader on a kiosk PC, could almost instantaneously call up their user profile, including rights to patients' dossiers and user-specific access to applications. The GINA mask would even display the doctor's photo while he/she typed in the PIN code.

This was based on Windows (forget which version), but the actual functionality was developed in-house. And I'm pretty sure we weren't the first to do anything of the sort.

Good luck, Mr. Jobs.

• The Unix-Haters largely come out of the community of users of Lisp machines, with a few "X haters" that preferred NeXTstep and NeWS;
• You probably don't work with mainframe folk; they are pretty desparaging of Unix-like stuff as being "toyish;"
• VMS users are a similarly proud (albeit seemingly fading) group that generally aren't big fans of Linux
• Then there's Multics ...
• Fewer people remember GECOS, Stratus, and such...
• PDP-10's ran such notable OSes as TOPS-10, ITS, all vastly not Unix.

Is ECMA a legitimate standards body?
Are they producing standards that help to advance the state of the art?

The reason I ask this is because my only previous knowledge of ECMA is the certification that JavaScript (aka ECMAscript) went through. If memory serves, the ECMA group was chosen over other more well known standards organizations because it was thought to be easier to influence, thereby orchestrating the outcome. Ever since then, I have wondered about this organization.

Now, ECMA is in the news again. But, this time, a Slashdot community member posts a link to the ECMA Web Site. So I have the opportunity to check out the roster of member companies. If you look at them, you will note that practically every one is a multinational that is not based in Europe.

I guess that this point, in itself, doesn't say much. Except that there must have been a much bigger number of true European companies in ECMA back when it was founded in 1961. But, then I notice that at least one European computer manufacturer that I know of, Bull isn't a member. Neither is Nokia, although Ericsson is.

There is an organizing body in the sport of boxing known as the IBF. It was created as an alternative to the WBA and WBC, and seems to exist for the sole purpose of having an alternate slate of champions who can challenge one of the more established sanctioning bodies' champions.

So, my ultimate question is, does ECMA serve the same role in the technology world that the IBF appears to serve in the boxing world?
--

Dave Aiello

It's not for playing quake.

I work at Bull and we sell the same machine basically only relabled (with additional software). Specs on the older (IBM S70) machine called Escala RL are at http://www-frec.bull.com/docs/escalar l470.htm

Linux missionaries saying "I can build a beowulf cluster using celerons that is ceaper and faster" will be solidly *clonked* in the head !

This is a big win, but with some caveats:

1. Their Linux supported hardware (Express 5800) are actually relabeled Zenith Data Systems (a.k.a. Euro-Packard Bell/NEC) Intel server systems. Their link from the main Bull Linux page was broken, so try this one: Express5800 HX4600. No word on PPC systems yet.

2. They seem to be leaning heavily toward RedHat, but also include SuSE, Caldera and Pacific Hi-Tech in their announcements. Their European customer base might prefer SuSE. This also might impact their ability to get strong crypto tools installed worldwide without US intervention.

3. They mention porting OpenMaster to Linux; anybody have any comments on that tool set? It seems like it competes in the Tivoli/Unicenter/OpenView/Patrol/etc. systems management arena.


#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak

Don't forget to take a look at the the full press release, and Bull's Linux Web Page for the complete story.

Don't forget to take a look at the the full press release, and Bull's Linux Web Page for the complete story.