Slashdot Mirror

Is the Mainframe (and COBOL) Dead? ... No way!

Mainframes can (and often do) run Java & Linux via ZAAP (Hardware JVM) and IFL (Hardware Integrated Facility for Linux).

System Z (the latest IBM marketing name) is the best platform for transactional processing bar none. (Check the independent TCO studies). !

Factoids...
"200 Billion lines of COBOL code in existence" eWeek!
"5 Billion lines of COBOL code added yearly" Bill Ulrich, TSG Inc.!
"Between 850K and 1.3 Million COBOL developers" IDC
"Majority of customer data still on mainframes" Computerworld
"Replacement costs $20 Trillion" eWeek
Researchers at Aberdeen Group recently found that about 70% of the world's business data is still processed by mainframe applications written in Cobol. According to Gartner Group, that number is closer to 75%.


Links...
http://www.arcati.com/dinomyth.pdf
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/
http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=19147 25230&rid=-500


Note: Universities are reintroducing COBOL to their IT Courses due to growing demand. See: http://courseprofile.cqu.edu.au/profile.jsp?course id=16508

Life gets better for the COBOL, PL/I or Assembler code cutter, IBM now have Eclipse based tools for editing, debugging, etc. on the mainframe (Eclipse runs in Wintel or Linux Desktop and it connects to you mainframe resources via TCP/IP). The tool even lets you generate / edit / manage z/OS JCL and execute batch jobs etc. (WebSphere Developer for Z)

CICS transaction can be deployed as a Web Service at a click of a button, which means that the traditional transaction processing engine can be easily integrated into the latest SOA based business processes.

"Although most people are blissfully unaware of CICS, they probably make use of it several times a week, for almost every commercial electronic transaction they make. In the whole scheme of things, CICS is *much* more important the Microsoft Windows." Martin Cambell-Kelly, "From Airline Reservations to Sonic Hedgehog" (a History of the Software Industry), MIT Press 2003

I first read this article on an Australian site (http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;8103 29453/) last week and it has been syndicated and is doing the rounds. This guy, Howard whoever he is, clearly has done zero research and has no facts to back up his comments - especially the finale.

At the end of last year the EU Commission released one of the most comprehensive reports on the impact, spread and use of Open Source, around the world. They found that, in actual fact, only around 10% of those who contribute to Open Source projects (the software engineers) are employed by proprietary vendors - the overwhelming majority are employed by the enterprises Howard so cynically believes are using FLOSS purely to beat down the cost of proprietary systems.

You can download the entire report from the EU itself here: http://flossimpact.eu/

There are many other reports from major research organisations that are concluding similar things. Forrester research has recently found that over 50% of large enterprises are using FLOSS in mission critical applications and this is growing.

A quick Google would lead Howard to many of these findings.

'these machines would have to be a little bit more robust than linux is capable of being at the moment'

What stability issue, and do you have an citations for major data loss because of the stability issue. Is IBM fibbing when it refers to its legendary stability.

'One of Linux's claims to fame is its legendary stability'

'Manufacturer moves to Linux for stability'

'As the manufacturer had already used Linux, it was aware of its great stability. SAP, combined with IBM and Linux offered the best deal in terms of price and performance

'Linux systems excel in many areas, ranging from end-user concerns such as stability, speed, and ease of use, to serious concerns such as development and networking'

hmm (in a story about the NYSE moving to Linux inject a little stability FUD)

From a Computerworld interview with Roel Vertegaal, the researcher responsible for the technology:

Although Vertegaal ruled out the marriage of the eyebox2 technology with retina scanners or image capturing devices, he conceded the possibility was out there and warned that if customers chose to combine the eyebox2 technology with other image capturing devices, there was little his company could do about it.

"[Already], face recognition software is being used in Europe to track shopping mall theft," he said. "While we do not encourage such use, and given that our cameras cannot identify people or provide images, it still seems these directions are already being taken by other companies regardless of our hardware."

Digg is run on 100 servers.

Even better, a clean article-only, non-advertising version of the article here: http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;86278 6408;fp;;fpid;;pf;1

Link corrected.

Can be found here. No ads, pleasant to read, all on one page! (Posting AC to avoid karma whore accusations).

Anyway, Linux or BSD is guaranteed freedom

Linux supports TPM natively. Mac OS X doesn't (and more recent Macs don't even include the hardware anymore).

My main objection to apt is that on 2 seperate occasions (once with Xandros, and once with Debian itself) I've had apt go berserk when trying to uninstall Open Office...the dep chain somehow got confused and I ended up with a completely corrupted system. It was deleting things in what seemed like an entirely random manner. That in my mind is not a stable system.

Subpackaging is an attrocity in both systems as well...it makes source compilation outside either system (for scenarios where you find a package where there isn't an rpm/deb; it does happen) largely impossible.

The other thing is that saying you can put a custom kernel in without the system complaining isn't anything Debian users should be bragging about...it can be done in Slackware, minus the screwing around with making a kernel deb.

A lot of Debian fanboys here might love apt...but it isn't the silver bullet it's made out to be. As I said earlier, for end users who don't use much other than Open Office, XMMS, VLC, and Firefox, it'd be fine...but for those of us who want to use our systems for something slightly more meaningful, there are areas where it is wanting.

* Microsoft says it will not file any lawsuits against developers over any patent issues

Yes, this is a review, but some of you guys may have not thought long enough about the smoke and mirrors and are still are in denial about Novell:

1. The MS/Novell deal really was just Novell paying for both companies to announce protection for Novell customers. The rest was just window dressing.

2. Balmer

You already know about the Balmer thing, but maybe you need to think it over again without deal-fluff: a taste of things to come and you can thank Novell for it.

This alleged exploit and its reactions of paranoia or debunkings are just noise. Sanitize now.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;18147 90366;fp;16;fpid;0;pf;1

Name three.

Kennards Hire, Europcar, De Bortoli Wines. Desktop use too.

Article with a bigger list here.

I've never seen PostgreSQL perform, ever.

Yes, you did, when you hit Slashdot or any .org site: the root name server for .org domain is using PostgreSQL. Postgres needs some knowledge to set it up properly, but it certainly could perform very well.

That's funny they say that, because their wireless network on campus runs on linux-based routers/APs made by Aruba Networks.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;75408 4996;fp;16;fpid;0

Anyone who believes that IDC isn't a Microsoft lapdog is sans clue and should be ignored. Obviously you sit in that camp. A 5 second trip to google and searching for "Microsoft funded IDC survey" yields 161,000 hits. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Microsoft+fun ded+IDC+survey History does not lie in this case. Anything from IDC which both touts Microsoft as a leader over *NIX and then espoused immediately by Microsoft has historically been funded by Microsoft. If you consider that bat guano, then so be it. Arguing against the facts is pointless and assinine. Just a sampling. http://www.daynesoftasia.com/English/NewEvents/THR EE.htm "The report has cast serious doubts on the Microsoft-funded TCO study undertaken by IDC" http://searchopensource.techtarget.com/originalCon tent/0,289142,sid39_gci885961,00.html "A Microsoft-funded IDC report that claims that the Linux TCO is 13% higher than an equivalent MS Windows solution" http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=14493 08906&fp=16&fpid=0 "The Yankee survey is just the latest to compare the TCO (total cost of ownership) of Windows and Linux, but is the first (unlike those from Jupiter Research Inc., Forrester and IDC) that have not been requested and funded by Microsoft." http://www.wininsider.com/news/?8861 "The Microsoft Partner Program got high marks from industry analysts at IDC in a recent survey comparing the channel programs of 25 top software vendors." http://www.computerworld.com/managementtopics/outs ourcing/itservices/story/0,10801,85963,00.html "Last month, some IT professionals reacted angrily to a Microsoft-funded report released by Cambridge, Mass.-based Forrester Research Inc. that concluded that developing and deploying Web-based portal applications is substantially less expensive using Microsoft technology than it is using a Linux/J2EE combination [QuickLink 41320]."

This is nothing new at all

I'll grant you that yes, prices have come down recently but surely every geek wants our scientific research budgets spent on a much worthier use for nanotubes.

• AMD's new fab, Fab 36, supports 300mm wafers (like Intels have for some time).
• It uses a 90nm process (Intel and IBM have been on 65nm for some time).
• It will transition to 65nm by the end of 2006.
• It will use 45nm and 32nm processes by the end of the decade.

How about rsync ? Microsoft are now playing catch-up with their Distributed File System Replication.

So Linux development has been hijacked by people that can afford $6600 toolkits?

You keep repeating that $6600 number, but not even the most expensive option for Qt is that high. If you take a look at their pricing, you have a full desktop edition for 2630. Nor is anything being hijacked, cheaper options are available. And if you're really that anti-Qt, noone is saying you can't write a GTK application with KDE integration.

What's the point crippling KDE (and hence Linux) with Qt - IF NOBODY USES IT FOR COMMERCIAL APPS ON LINUX?

That point can easily be proven wrong. HP uses Qt for their printer utilities on Linux. Google Earth is being ported to Linux, and yes, it uses Qt. Another example is Skype, which works on Linux as well as it does on Windows, thanks to Qt.

And if time to market and quality of tools are the most important aspects, why are you not using either Microsoft Visual C# or Borland Delphi / C++ Builder?

Maybe because Qt can be considered on par with these solutions? Or because being cross-platform is important?

Fedora overtook Suse within a year and a half in terms of users. It is now a close 3rd to Debian which is a far second from Red Hat (Red Hat and Fedora together have around 3 times the market share of Debian, check netcraft to confirm those numbers). The numbers on distrowatch are not downloads or users, that number is how many people clicked on the link to read about Ubuntu. Mark Shuttleworth is obscenely good at getting press about Ubuntu so the Ubuntu link gets a lot of click throughs, and now that it is at the top, it is kind of self fulfilling as interested people want to read about the top distro so they click on that more.

When it comes down to it, Fedora is the most advanced linux distribution out there. It comes standard with SELinux and virtualization. It uses LVM by default, integrates exec-shield and other code foritfying techniques into all major services. It has the latest and greatest of everything. Things just work in Fedora because a large portion of that code was coded by Red Hat. Red Hat maintains GCC and glibc, they commit more kernel code than anyone else, they play a large role in everything from Apache and Gnome to creating GCJ to get java to run natively under linux. Whether you like it or not, Fedora is the distro most professionals go with, despite what the slashdot popular oppinion is and despite the large amounts of noise that a few ubuntu users create.

Out of the big two, Novell and Red Hat, Novell has never been worse off and Red Hat has never been healthier. Red Hat doesn't officially provide support for Fedora, but it is built and paid for by Red Hat and their engineers (in addition to the community contributions). By targetting Fedora, IBM knows that they are targeting a stable platform with the largest array of hardware support. IBM is in bed with both Novell and Red Hat, they didn't choose Fedora because they were paid to or something... they chose Fedora based on technical merits. Claiming that Fedora is unstable is no different than claiming GMail is in beta, both products are still the best in their respective industries. Why do people go spreading FUD about such a good produc when they've never used it themselves? Whether you want to admit it or not, Fedora is the platform to target for most. It is compatible in large part with RHEL, so you're getting the most bang for your buck.

IBM doesn't just shit around, or make decisions for dumb reasons. If Fedora is good enough for IBM it is good enough for anyone. Apparently this is a common oppinion as more and more businesses switch to Fedora desktops. Here is one recent story of a major Australian company, Kennards, replacing 400 desktops with Fedora. Don't be so close minded or you might be left behind.
Regards,
Steve

LOL what a troll. You've probably never even used Fedora. It is enterprise quality. Don't beleive the nonsense that /. feeds you. Not to mention Fedora takes security significantly more serious. Suse is just not enterprise ready. Novell is making hardly any money off it because noone is using it. Fedora over took Suse's market share in under a year and a half according to netcraft (and no, there was not a symmetric decrease in Red Hat's share). Novell has done nothing good with Suse since they've bought it. Read this about a huge Australian firm that is switching 400 desktops to Fedora. Have you ever used Suse? It is a piece of crap. Things just don't work like they do in Fedora, which is reknowned for things just working. At least use the damn product before you make claims about it, don't be a troll. Not to mention that Novell is damn near going out of business, while Red Hat has never been healthier.
Regrds,
Steve

http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;75408 4996;fp;16;fpid;0 It's unofficial: Microsoft bets business on Linux Rodney Gedda 04/11/2005 08:31:35 The next time Bill Gates sends an e-mail through Microsoft's shiny new Wireless LAN it will be passed through a behind-the-scenes Linux-based network appliance. Earlier this year Microsoft and Aruba Networks jointly announced the two companies will work to replace Microsoft's existing Cisco wireless network with Aruba's centrally-managed infrastructure, which eliminates the need for individual changes on the access points. Aruba Networks was selected to provide the networking equipment for what is considered to be one of the world's largest next-generation wireless LANs, serving more than 25,000 simultaneous users a day in some 60 countries. According to an Aruba press statement, Microsoft's new WLAN will be deployed in 277 buildings covering more than 17 million square feet using Aruba mobility controllers, mobility software and some 5000 wireless access points. What the press statement didn't mention is that Aruba mobility controllers run the Linux operating system which Microsoft has aggressively targeted as being inferior to Windows as part of its "Get the Facts" marketing campaign. Mark Robards, Aruba Network's Asia-Pacific vice president, said the company's mobility controller switches provide integrated security, including a firewall, VPN, and hardware encryption, and they are "all Linux-based". Robards said the network rollout with Microsoft is going well and is likely to take two years to complete and will contain as many as 7000 access points. Indeed, Aruba is recruiting Linux developers to work on its mobility controller software. In an advertisement on the company's Web site, Aruba is seeking a senior Linux software engineer with "expert knowledge of Linux and extensive Linux kernel experience". Sunjeev Pandey, senior director of Microsoft IT, said the company is "pleased to be partnering with Aruba in the upgrade of Microsoft's next-generation wireless LAN". "This partnership will allow Microsoft to leverage a cutting-edge wireless and mobility platform that provides us the scalability, performance and security that our environment demands," Pandey said. Pandey's appraisal of Aruba's technology is in stark contrast to Microsoft's "Get the Facts" rhetoric which places Windows as a more secure, and higher-performing choice over Linux.

Computer World Article

ICS is a cornerstone of Customs' massive Cargo Management Re-engineering (CMR) project. This was intended to replace the export and brokerage industry-developed EDI system Customs Connect with a Web-based model co-developed by Customs and a consortium of IT vendors led by Computer Associates. The project aims to facilitate all aspects of Customs involvement in the import and export process including declarations and GST transactions collected at port.

Nother Article
More than seven years to this point of readiness, ICS is a cornerstone of Customs' massive Cargo Management Re-engineering (CMR) project, which will replace the export and brokerage industry-developed EDI system, Customs Connect. CMR is a Web-based model co-developed by Customs and a consortium of IT vendors led by Computer Associates, EDS, IBM and Telstra nee Kaz.

• 719 racks
• 63,272 machines
• 126,544 CPUs
• 253 THz of processing power
• 126,544 GB of RAM
• 5,062 TB of hard drive space

MySQL days are over. Let YourSQL be PostgreSQL. Huh! Sun will choose PostgreSQL

'prime time' enough for Sun.

"Patent infringement isn't a serious problem for open source projects. It might be a problem for open source companies, but that's their problem.
-russ"

That's right. Speak with the voice of stupidity.

No patents harmed PostgreSQL (ARC)

No patents harmed rproxy (http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;8391 60262;fp;512;fpid;968099126) for web page speed up.

No patents harmed fontconfig (pcode character hinting)

No patents harmed iSCSI (dual CRCs for PDU rather than the same algorithm used for ATM).

No patents harmed GNOME (spring loaded folders).

Please pull you head in and stop making a nuisence of yourself. You obviously have no clue what you are talking about.

Basicly, it's about time Cisco implimented some form of DEP protection ... Or check their bloody code of course.

The latter, preferably. It is dangerous to rely on DEP alone (or rather, NX protection - DEP is M$ terminology). There is some info here, where the following point is noted:

We ran the same test on a desktop with an AMD Athlon 64 processor and a laptop with a new Intel Pentium M chip, and the attack program got nowhere. This defense wasn't without its cost: Each time, the computer crashed as the attacking program tried to batter its way into the NX-protected neighborhood. A single buffer overflow should be blocked without incident by NX, but this barrage was too much.

So even with DEP/NX, it is still may be possible to do a DoS attack, even if you can't gain control of the machine.

This entire slashdot news post is misleading.

Intel's press release is based on the fact on that Computerworld's article claims that Intel is adding unnounced DRM features to their new line of Pentiums. If anyone actually read the article, it does not say ANYWHERE anything about unannounced DRM features. In fact, I would say that the Computerworld article and the Intel press release are saying basically the same thing, with their respective biases present. Honestly, the only thing newsworthy here is that Intel announced the specific DRM implementations in their chipsets.

Lastly, an opinion... DRM is not something I really would like to see implemented on the CPU-level. I don't think "THE MAN" should be controlling what I can or can't do with media that exists on my computer.

Even if their denial of including hidden DRM tech is completely true, it justifies the original story, and the community reaction against the idea which clearly produced this denial. Preemptive criticism of such tech from early adopters and qualified critics is valuable. Once the DRM is in the chips, it's much more costly to get it out. And some critics will be quiet, accepting the fait accompli as less likely to be reversed than other priorities with less committed vendor investment.

A major problem with the press these days is their total disinterest in covering a "developing story" of a threat, until it has already caused irreparable damage. While threateners are much better at keeping threats secret until they do that damage. Even worse, many of the threats come from preemptive actions that do much damage, before the press reports on the threat itself, or even the preemption, until it's too late.

Julian Bajkowski, in his CTA article took a vague Intel announcement that new chipsets "support" Microsoft DRM to mean that DRM itself is embedded in the chipsets. Since MS DRM requires all kinds of tech in the chips to support its features that are much more general purpose than just DRM (even simple 8086 memory access and register logic "supports DRM"), that leap is unsubstantiated speculation, though possible. So Bajkowski/CTA presented the analysis unprofessionally - though the analysis itself is worthwhile to discuss.

The modern press is afflicted with a major problem: its staff is so automated, so powerful in research, publishing, and fraternal immediate communication, that journalistic professionalism is no longer necessary to get one's content consumed. The lowered barrier to entry fills the field with unskilled workers; their essential reporting less useful. Because the bad logic undermines credibility, while the slick stationery, flashy handwriting, and express delivery market the message more widely than ever.

I would point out the broad applicability of this criticism to most modern journalism, well beyond chip technology, but that scope seems obvious. Tech is a business long accustomed to PR masquerading as journalism, with informed professionals consuming such journalism with skepticism, cross referencing, and a twitchy BS detector. Beyond the tech beat, most news consumers just accept the journalism at face value. And base much more important decisions on it than which CPU to buy.

However, it still won't convince some to switch to a GNU/Linux distro such as Debian. Not until GNU/Linux finds solutions to better usability, interface, easy configuring and easy installation without a repository.

No wonder why a college in Melbourne, Australia switched from Debian to OS X. And others are already planning the switch to OS X.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;13028 41680;fp;16;fpid;0

Because GNU/Linux is not yet ready for the masses. OS X is ready for anyone to use as it simply works and is very easy to use.

No matter what you say, one of the problems with Linux is that it is difficult to install programs if they're not in some repository. There have been some solutions to solve this with universal installers such as Zero Install and Autopackage that will make it hassle free for installation, but the Linux community fail to see how this can help them. And commercial software are quite hesitant as they don't want to deal with installation problems on all the different Linux platforms.

Another problem with Linux is their lack of marketing their software/products, usability, and having a better GUI. There are many good GNU/Linux programmers, but fail to have the knowledge of the three areas, something that Apple are experts at. It's not just about coding software, but having people to help those programmers in these important areas.

It is no wonder why Trinity College, in Melbourne, Australia, dumped Debian in order to switch to OS X.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;13028 41680;fp;16;fpid;0

This is not intended in any way as a troll (merely informative to other readers who may not have come across him yet and wonder what we are talking about), but I take it from the UID you do this with the full knowledge that Theo is, on all apparent evidence, a bit of a nutter, a bullshitter (with reference to his utter bollocks about 'Linuxes'), and that rather than OpenBSD being founded out of some earnest devotion to security of his[1], it was because his access to the NetBSD CVS repository was pulled, on the grounds that he was being a class jerk to both users and other developers (not a exactly an isolated incident).

[1] In fact, he originally intended it to be called NextBSD, because he seemed he was basically intent on running his own show all along (which seems to me to be due to him 'not playing well with others').

While the development of OpenSSH remains a much valued contribution, from a security standpoint OpenBSD really has a long way to go to catch up to Linux as far as meaningful features go (the security hype being primarily based on (a) the contribution of OpenSSH - which Theo said he didn't want to make for any OS other than OpenBSD! - and (b) simply having all the services turned off on a default installation).

Specifically (and unlike Linux) OpenBSD doesn't support MAC (Mandatory Access Control) restriction on files, nor does it allow the restriction of access to raw devices, memory or sockets for any user (including processes executed as root), hell it doesn't even have ACL's (Access Control Lists) support without a 3rd party patch (e.g. with patches based on FreeBSD 5's implementation), and they don't seem to 'get' why anyone would want it. In fact, they have *actively* decided not to even attempt to implement POSIX.1e (according to this book, endorsed by Theo).

These are features that have been supported by Linux for years. If (and I honestly think it's going to be 'if' rather than 'when' now), OpenBSD begins work to implement these features, then it might start to be considered useful as a secure platform. Until then, it's very lacking in meaningful features indeed. In fact, other BSD variants are already ahead of OpenBSD in so far as implementing them (such as FreeBSD and TrustedBSD).

I realise it's considered easier to criticise than give due credit by some, but in the case of Theo De Ratt I can't see that the amount of credit he gets from some quarters is warranted.

In conclusion, this is why I find the inference that he is 'very wise and well intentioned' at best riotously amusing. ;-)

( YMMV. :)

Geronimo was forked off JBoss because a number of developers found JBoss Inc difficult to work with.

There you go, now you don't have to worry about having nothing to worry about.

For those wondering what Microsoft has been "doing" for the last 12 months, and how they are spending their billions in revenue. since it's clearly not about "product development", one hint was given by Eben Moglen, who says they have been hiring lawyers for the last 12 months and using them to shake down companies for cash in advance who use free software over "potential" patent disputes. In other words extorcion and racketeering. But you can read about this .

This should be a familiar problem. You try to sell a cheaper system by stripping out features. But to get rid of those features, you have to tool up from scratch, and your system ends up costing more money than you save. That's what killed the legacy-free PC, and a lot of other stuff.

They could also "spin off" the hardware business into it's own entity, or sell it outright to an appropriate firm.

You mean like the sale of IBM's PC division to Lenovo of China?

Wouldn't it piss off SCO no end if someone produced a scorun app?

They already did, and as I remember SCO were mighty pissed off.

Story

http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;18136 34491;fp;16;fpid;0

A study on EDS' own web site confirms they use it and love it.

The opposition to Linux is so uniformly pathetic...it truly boggles the mind.

This is a great form of marketing and has been for a long time for corps with an image issue. Mr Gates has an image issue. MS has a bigger image issue. It may be out of the goodness of his heart, as many peoples' hearts turn from stone as they get older, but IIRC, these donations started shortly after consulting a firm about the image problem. Try here, here, and a more positive spin here.

Thus, you can carry the voice traffic on the data network and completely eliminate the voice network.

From this article:

A converged voice and data network may sound like a fabulous idea until you remember the last time a worm or denial of service attack brought your network to its knees. Do you really want the network and your phone system to go down together?

More properly, that should be modded "Silly" - or "Clueless GNU/Linux zealot". Time for new categories.. :) - because

- Considering the lack of media hype, it *is* indeed an amazing result.

- That link was posted in response to people cluelessly asserting that BSD's dying, and that's indeed a pretty convincing answer, I think, since that number is growing at the rate of half a million a year.

- No one suggests *BSD is the leader in the OS market. The leader is still Windows(TM). Reason? Well, too few competent people around. :)

P.S. Since OpenBSD's the proper topic, let's note that it's getting more and more attention from the specialized press. Here and here are a couple of very recent interviews with the project leader Theo de Raadt, talking about the history and philosophy of OpenBSD.

It's very simple: Gartner comments on industry trends. Wal-Mart and other major retailers are selling a relatively huge number of PCs equipped with Linux. That's the trend, and that's what Gartner is commenting on.

No, what Gartner did is take observations in Asia, where bootleg Windows CDs are available in computer stores, and try to apply that to world-wide Linux sales/usage.

But this is not something that Linus Torvalds or anybody running Linux should take personally. If people choose to see this as an issue of "blame," then blame Wal-Mart and the other retailers who recognize a marketing opportunity when they see it, or blame those who'd use this Gartner report to promote an agenda.

You've completely missed the point of the so-called study. The conclusion goes something like this: "Since people in Asia are installing bootlegged Windows on Linux PCs, the number of people world-wide using Linux is much smaller than the number of PCs sold with Linux, and that trend will remain so in the future." This ignores the people who don't bootleg Windows, those who buy a Windows PC and wipe it, and those who build their own systems. The study is just plain dodgy.

Precisely. Analyst firms will occasionally be commissioned by third parties to do reports and studies, but they remain independent.

Of course they do.

A firewall ? Theo de Raadt just said that a firewall won't fix the windows security, for very good reasons..

Here's the ISOC's response to Oracle FUD.

We believe that the key point relating to databases for the .ORG
redelegation is not which database the operator is using, but,
rather, whether the database will support the .ORG registry in a
stable, scalable, and highly available manner.

Afilias has over a year of experience running a large scale gTLD
registry--the .INFO registry. This direct experience, the load &
stress tests conducted by Afilias (and listed in our proposal
<http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/applicati ons/isoc/section3.html#c17.10>),
and Afilias' compliance with ICANN's service level requirements clearly
demonstrate that the PostgreSQL database used by Afilias performs
at the level of reliability and availability required for the
mission critical operations of a global gTLD registry.

Further, the actual operating performance record of Afilias compares
very favorably to the records of the other .ORG applicants, many of
whom use commercial databases. A review of each bidder.s answers to
Question 14 <http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/questions-to-applic ants-14.htm>
illustrates the kind of hard data and real world registry experience
that ICANN is basing its decision on. Afilias has delivered this level
of performance based in part on its stable, reliable database, PostgreSQL.

The successful operation of a registry extends beyond simply which
database software is in use. It also requires a skilled operating staff
with the ability to design and implement reliable systems as well as
establish clearly defined resolution paths should problems occur.
Afilias' solid operating performance lends support to the claims in our
.ORG proposal regarding our ability to effectively manage the .ORG domain.

We do not take issue with the recitation of the many features and
benefits of Oracle's products. However, any suggestion that PostgreSQL
is unsuited for registry use is in direct contradiction to the facts.

linky linky