Slashdot Mirror
NYSE Goes To Linux
Aligrip writes "It appears that IBM has convinced the folks at the Securities Industry Automation Corp (SIAC) to move their entire trading network to Linux as explained in this article in the Investors Business Daily. The authors predict that this deal could give Linux "a hot new beachhead with financial institutions". Cool!"
Maybe they can put some code in there to boost some of the Linux stocks now...
Especially since the Financial field uses alot of very custom made stuff, it is not like thay are just going to go with Access.
The hidden advantadge is that people with access to money will now have first hand experience with Linux, and this will expose any lies in the marketing spin that is out there.
- - -
Radio Free Nation
is an independant news site based on Slash Code
"If You have a Story, We have a Soap Box"
- - -
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Graham says SIAC converted to Linux quickly because of the software's open, flexible nature. "We were able to port our Artmail application in about two-and-a-half days," Graham said.
I would speculate they weren't running NT before if it was that easy to port their software over. So this takes a chunk out of the proprietary Unix market, sure, but if we were to consider this a Zero Sum game, Unix loses, Linux gains, Microsoft doesn't change a thing.
Now granted, other Unix shops might now say 'Well, if the NYSE does it, we can do it too!' But the Microsoft market won't feel any pressure from this until there is a similar porting comment when coming from a Windows shop.
I guess it becomes interesting now that one of the nation's largest financial institutions is running on free software. I think this is going to make a very powerful case for open source software in both small and large businesses, and even in market places where big money is traded. It means that finally the big guys are beginning to realize that stability and reliability are more important than unstable fads and fuds. (note my pathetic pun).
Oh yes, for the sake of redundancy, I will repeat that earlier post: All your investments are belong to us!
Am I a hipster-doofus?
"Stock trades are one of the most sensitive, secure and important kinds of transactions that exist,? said John Patrick, vice president of Internet technology at IBM. ?This deal has removed any doubt that Linux is ready for the mainstream and that it can play a major role in electronic businesses of all kinds and sizes."
This is not something I was expecting. Wonderful news! Linux can no longer be dismissed as a 'hacker' or 'hobby' operating system. It's industrial-strength!
LUSER: "You use Linux? I read in Micosoft Press Release Daily that it's not a real operating system, it's not reliable
ME: "Yeah, well, IBM and the NYSE doesn't think so. You're fund manager trades your stocks over a linux-based network."
Where does MS go from there?
Software Wars
Duh ...
...
We are talking about traders here, not hackers. What do you think these traders do ? Right, they buy/sell bonds, shares, options and futures. They have a nice UI for that purpose and the only time they leave their UI is for using a spreadsheet (graph) or sending/reading email. They _never_ hack together a script for analysing stock-data, they have big teams of business analysts to do that (with also custom made programs). And no, i don't buy that 'if their boss isn't looking' crap: traders don't have time to do chit-chat
So, they don't care about user friendlyness as long as they can easily access their trading-UI, spreadsheet and email-client.
So, the only issue here is the UI, not the distro. Use Gnome, KDE, Windowmaker or whatever that's best for the admins: just put 3 big icons on the desktop and everybody is happy.
I work for a bank so i know a little how these people work/think.
They can say whatever they want. Linux will bloom people!
Yes. But behind-the-scenes transaction handling has no connection to the desktop world. I am tired of seeing every article like "Home Depot to use Linux-driven cash registers" turned into a reason for zealotry.
Read the article. Linux is running the "gear box". That is Linux is running the backend transport system sort of like SMTP in a mail system but, for stock transactions.
The traders won't be running Mandrake or any other distro for that matter. But, the transactions will be transported on a Linux controlled backbone.
WAY too many financial institutions use M$ languages and OS's for their internal users... like customer support and other operations centers. VB applications abound...
I've found that the best way to get companies to move away from M$ programming languages is to suggest the portability and standardization and other benefits that occur when you start making your apps available through a web interface. Then, as the developer on that project, keep everything as cross-platform, cross-browser as possible. Once the frontend/interface doesn't require a M$ language to support it, there becomes less of a reason to stay on the architecture.
In addition, this approach is becoming much more successful since EVERYONE is trying to cut costs... and what's a better way to cut costs then eliminate the need for costly M$ licenses?
Slashdot uses MySQL, anyone using MySQL and a large db with lots of traffic knows MySQL is not suited for the task, thats why slashdot goes down. Im sure NYSE knows about this and will choose either oracle or another larger db on a different OS. when NYSE sais they are switching to linux they dont say what parts they are switching, all or some.
Chris Lee
lee@mediawaveonline.com
They will be using Linux as the platform for the messaging and information systems between the Exchange and the brokers/dealers, not the actual Exchange itself. I'm not saying these systems are not mission critical, I'm just reading the article!
Running the actual Exchange would be a major coop, but I don't think there is any chance of seeing that happen for a few years yet.
Note: I'm not saying Linux can't be used to run the Exchange, but I think this is best handled by a full-blown enterprise platform at this point in the development of Linux.
Just an errant thought as I read the article. Could it be the old giant, IBM has shown us some of the blue-fu that has kept this company around near or on the top for so many years ? For example:
... selling services. Let's face it, there's not much in the way of COTS that Microsoft can FUD with when it comes to Wall Streeters, and their propensity to roll and re-roll their own apps.
Bird 1 - undercutting Sun high-end
"SIAC's Artmail applications previously ran on Sun Microsystems Inc. servers that used Unix. But they will now run on IBM Linux servers linked to an IBM mainframe system."
IBM's girthieness has been a liability in the past. Not so much for the hardware itself; though expensive. Rather, much of the rub has been on the expense and limitations of its operating system, as anyone using MVS will attest. Linux literally flips that around against it's competitors, forcing companies such as Sun's high-end to compete chip-to-chip with IBM's mid to low end iron.
Stone 2 - Microsoft's cost of Open Source argument
"Though basic Linux software is free, IBM makes money by selling the middleware that links Linux with existing software and computer systems at places like SIAC. It also makes money by selling Linux servers and services for Linux-based systems."
Here IBM parlays one of its biggest, and most enduring strengths
Kudos to someone where at Itty Bitty Machines for figuring this one out.
healyourchurchwebsite.com - WWJB?
It's not a matter of "big iron" and "geek desktops". It's about servers. The reason you don't see point-of-sale systems on Linux is that Linux--like any Unix--is still a relatively awkward choice for standalone and small-network desktop use. It's easy enough to get running for one-off engineering workstations and for hundreds or thousands of X terminals, but the cost savings and overall benefits of a Unix just aren't there for those 5-100 seat mixed-use installations found in most desktop environments.
.5TB range can run on Linux now. And that's a lot of databases.
.NET) or with Java. And since that Java code really does move--unmodified--from Windows developer workstations to staging servers and production boxes that can be running any of a good dozen OSes on hardware going all the way up to mainframes, with application servers that are increasingly interoperable and interchangeable, Java's looking pretty good.
Want a stable, non-windowed PC-based cash register? Linux gives you nothing you can't get with DOS, Netware or OS/2-based systems. There's little reason for vendors to port, and the application is so narrow that Linux offers nothing but a savings on OS licenses, which are insignificant to the cost of a 5-station point-of-sale system.
Running a small- to mid-sized office? Linux is a decent way to save on servers, and many companies do so, buying mail and file-sharing appliances like Cobalt Qubes, or IBM's Small Business Server software bundle, which gives small but ambitious companies a nicely priced bundle of DB2, Domino and Websphere. Still others bring on the accountant's nephew to set up a Samba server or two. But on the desktop? Unix and Linux office suites are mediocre at best, the best being slower and more memory-hungry than MS Office. And you can be the one to tell the senior managers how good Linux is the tenth time they can't properly open an MS Office file that was mailed to them.
Where Linux is taking over the world is on servers, and now it's not just the usual HTTP, Samba, DNS and SMTP services. In the past year, with good 1.3.x JVMs from Sun and IBM, Linux is now on par with any other platform, dollar for dollar, for running J2EE application servers.
If you're running clusters of Weblogic, Websphere or other EJB/servlet/JSP engines (Tomcat, JRun, EJBoss, etc.), there's simply no longer any technical reason to do it on Solaris, HPUX, Win2K or AIX. If you have a decent JVM (as Linux has) and decent networking and memory management (as Linux has, especially with 2.4), that's all that really matters. Why pay $700, $3000 or more on OS licenses and OS support per machine for something that you just want to (1) stay up and (2) run a Java app server or one or more of its support systems like a message queue?
Moreover, the move to journaling filesystems and better support for external storage, and the availability of many mainstream commercial-grade backup and system management tools means Linux is also a perfectly good way to run all those 1-4 CPU database servers. Oracle and DB2 on Linux aren't going to eat into the Sun E10000's turf or IBM's OS/400 and System/390 spaces just yet, but all those databases running on 1U-5U rack equipment with storage in the
Add to that the fact that Linux has become (officially or not) the reference platform for a lot of Unix software, and the reference x86 Unix for many others (see Sybase) and Linux looks poised to eat not just the low end but also the middle of the server market.
The success of server-side Java has a lot to do with this. Right now, the overwhelming share of new server-side development is being done either with the MS platform (ASP, MTS, COM and the early bits of
Don't think for a second that MS execs' stomachs are not turning over about this deal.
This is a key financial services application, and opens the door for acceptance of linux in key financial markets. Microsoft was going to undersell and overmarket traditional UNIX vendors and eat into the server market. Once their foot was in the door, extend and embrace.
Guess what - the markets grow from the bottom. It happened with DOS against MacOS. It happened with Windows95 against OS/2. It happened with NT against Unix. And now it is happening with linux against Windows.
This could have been a HUGE win for Microsoft. Instead, it is another notch in IBM's belt, and a huge boost for linux in the perception of CTOs. Microsoft can't buy that kind of publicity.
I think you guys need to read this again. NYSE does not run on Linux. A messaging system that connects to NYSE and advises external parties of trades runs on Linux. Apparently the core systems are still running... whatever it is they used to run.
Still a big deal for Linux, but you can't really say NYSE runs on Linux. You could say that PART of NYSE runs on Linux.
WebGuyCS