Slashdot Mirror
Wall Street Embraces Linux
Brian Stretch was among several
who sent in this story about Merrill Lynch
switching to Linux, this is interesting because it's actually companywide.
Talks about Red Hat, Linux threatening Unix and so on.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Quoth the column:
Also, contrary to popular belief, Linux is not really "free." How are large-scale licensing agreements to be worked out?
"Some of these things make us very uncomfortable," says Carey, who is trying to hammer out the details.
I don't understand how Linux could be much more "free". Maybe Forbes has a different definition of "free" than the rest of us?
www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
I know I would feel safer if the air traffic control is on Linux rather than any version of Windows...
Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com
Before all you Slashbots start screaming "Windoze Suxors!", read the article, and realize Merill is replacing their UNIX systems with Linux. There is no mention of replacing any Windows systems.
It hurts when I pee.
... But it seemed like only a matter of time before the major players in the business world adopted linux. Hate to jump on the 'Hate MS' Bandwagon, but MS has really fumbled the ball lately. As Linux becomes more widespread, and more competent people who know how to install/run/use it get into the job market, we will see more of these types of stories being commonplace.
The problem I see is, so many people are trying to force feed the linux solution down peoples throats. Yes, advocate linux, but dont throw your hand. Managers and the ones who make business decisions like thinking they stumbled upon a great idea. For the most part, they wont take kindly to some geeky kid in IT telling them "we can save bunches of money with linux"... they have to talk to their buddies on the golf course, etc etc..
To sum it up...dont fret, in time, linux _will_ dominate
I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
Not free as in beer, free as in free market, ergo free as in pay. Weird, I know, but it makes sense if you're a Capitalist Tool.
sulli
RTFJ.
"Would I put an air traffic control system on Linux right now? No," says Carey. "But can it get there within five years? Absolutely."
Actually, I work in the aviation sector, and we've been using Linux for years for computing flight plans and relaying AFTN messages.
Linux is killing Big Iron. It's hurting Sun in particular. People started running Linux so they could get UNIX-like functionality and performance on their cheap Intel boxes. Whether it has reached that point of being as good as Solaris/AIX/IRIX is debatable, but the fact is people are dumping their UNIX boxes for cheap x86 boxes running Linux.
What does that mean for the bigger picture? Say goodbye to high-performance computing outside the Intel-compatible world. PA-RISC? Dead. Alpha? Dead. MIPS? Not even close to competing anymore. SPARC? Future questionable. PowerPC? It's an okay chip, but the outdated I/O on Apple machines negates any (debatable in the first place) performance advantage it might have.
What might seem good at first (more Linux everywhere) is bad for the future of high-performance computing.
Linux seems to be helping shore up Intel's hardware monopoly, as well as lengthening the lifespan of the decrepit x86 architecture.
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
"Initially it was about cost savings but it has been a benefit to the business because we're profiting from being more flexible," says Steve Yatko, chief technology officer of securities IT at CSFB. "Our trading volume has increased [twenty-fold], and our customers are seeing better pricing. And things that used to take days [like installing applications and doing management tasks] now take minutes."
That's a great quote to take to the PHB's. What's even better about it is that it isn't limited to Linux's benefits vs. any particular platform, but against the whole universe of closed source.
But then there's this:
Also, contrary to popular belief, Linux is not really "free." How are large-scale licensing agreements to be worked out?
Umm, how about like this. Buy or download a copy, modify however you like, and install it everywhere you want. As long as you aren't releasing it outside the organization (and there's no way they would) they don't need to worry about licensing or IP.
Nope, no sig
Thousands of copies getting potentially used means revenues of, what, about $150 for that single copy?
Marge, CALL MY BROKER AND BUY RED HAT! BUY BUY BUY!!
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
My Brother works for Merrill Lynch. He is in the London office. I was there on vacation a couple weeks ago and I had the oppurtunity to visit the new Merril Office there. It's very cool btw. What I saw on my brother's desk was 2 machines. One Sun and one dell, both dual head, flat panel. As it says in the article, Sun is being displaced on the desktop in this particular instance. It will be interesting when I visit him again and I go to the office. What will I see? One Windows machine or one Linux Machine, or just Linux replacing Sun and Windows staying as is.
Obviously Lisa DiCarlo really understands the comcepts in the story she just wrote. Yeah.
But I hate to see people moving to Red Hat based distros. I know they have the support network that compaines of that size need and all. But, I think that we risk building another monopoly in the linux market. There are already tons of people who think that Red Hat *IS* linux. Personally I can't stand Red Hat distros with all of their default bloatware. I would love to see a good comercial support company for Debian.
First, Merrill Lynch praised the portability of Linux applications and their ability to scale across the enterprise, with a swipe at proprietary applications. Maybe they'll wake up for a moment, and realize what their most locked-in platform is.
Second, this seems to be largely a matter of Linux moving into Unix turf. I expect to see some minor disasters happen with this type of migration, and that's a Good Thing. Why, because part of the savings is moving onto dirt cheap PCs from expensive hardware. Part of the expense of that old hardware is the label, but part is genuine quality, too. After someone starts to get a handle on money lost because PCs are too cheap, causing down-time and even some erroneous data, there will be a move to put some quality back in. We will all have a better quality spectrum to buy from, and it will be better labeled and reviewed.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Yahoo mail lets you embed yahoo calender links easily...in fact you can embed the Yahoo calender links in any type of communication.
Come on, you haven't looked very hard - most of the web calendar programs allow you to mail "add this event to my calendar links"...in fact its so obvious you are nearly in troll territory.
They still use lots of Wintel for office applications, but the databases and the core apps run on Unix. So they are probably getting tired of paying the Sun tax, and don't relish replacing it with a Microsoft tax.
sPh
1) How do you work around the complete lack of server-side productivity software on Linux servers? By deploying Exchange, you can make scheduling a meeting as easy as sending an email with a time and having everyone click to confirm the meeting, which is then added to everyone's calendar. There is no solution like this without using Exchange (and I've looked.)
You have to understand this doesn't have much of anything to do with Linux, at least what they are using it for; you're talking about extending functionality of an email client/server. I'd suspect to see stuff coming from Ximian in this area as they target the desktop. However, with no users to support the development of such a project it's currently not worth it. Also this article isn't about desktop usage, it's about server usage. If you want the answer to that question
you simply just have to look at who currently uses linux and for what. You also have to look at the numbers of users on desktop.
2) How do you work around the lack of group policy controls in SAMBA? By this I mean forcing a computer to have the most up-to-date anti-virus software when it logs on to the domain; mapping network drives automatically; downloading OS patches automatically through a local server. AFAIK, Samba can't do any of this as well as a Windows 2000 Server can. And what about Active Directory? LDAP isn't as cohesive a solution if you are running Windows clients.
Blah this can be done if you know what you're doing, with some scripts. Not only that but I believe RedHat provides some type of functionality for this. Samba can't do the almighty everything without proper documentation and records/structures. Obviously Microsoft doesn't provide this so you take what you get for free. Last I checked you didn't pay for Samba, also last
I checked Microsoft hasn't released any specs recently enabling such operation, for any of the above you mention. However again you get this stuff for free, so you save costs and get minimal functionality if you have to support Windows users. If you're a windows based shop you have to pay thats what it boils down to.
From this article, I have to think that Merrill Lynch and others are changing their external server infrastructure, not their internal IT infrastructure.
This has nothing to do with external/internal infrastructure; they are replacing their sun boxen with linux boxen because it's cheaper and they get more bang for their buck. Wall St has used Unix for most of their vital financial etc etc transactions, they use os/2 as well. You won't find NT in operation anywhere the word "vital" is important on Wall St. For the most part this sounds totally alien of any internal/external server infrastructure I'd have to believe, that is how Wall st works.
The other conclusion I must draw is that the companies that are migrating to Linux as a workgroup server (i.e. replacing Windows NT/2000 Server with Linux) did not have a cohesive Windows network in the first place. Unfortunately, Linux is nowhere near a solution to Exchange, and it's perhaps 25% of the way to replacing a Windows 2000 primary domain controller's capabilities.
Blah, Exchange is an server application it has nothing to do with the rest of the network, and thats why Ximian just released it's Ximian Connector or whatever for Evolution. If Linux does make it on the desktop then their is a migratrion path and I'd figure if Ximian saw something like this coming down the pipe they'd look into replacing Exchange. There just isn't demand for something like that right now.. Just see #1 reply. You can't be serious about the pdc comment; thats all I have to say about that, I mean that is mostly laughable.
So what servers is Merrill Lynch migrating? Linux does have its core competencies -- web servers; application servers; network storage to some degree -- but they didn't mention what part of the infrastructure they were replacing. I would thus take the words "companywide" with a grain of salt in this case.
The article does say they are migrating their sun boxen, so thats what I tend to believe. Whatever functionality their sun boxen had is what they
would reproduce on Linux. Since you say all the above is not possible you should be able to deduce that it's most likely none of the above, once you
deduced that you'd either have the idea to ask Merril Lynch themselves or just leave the question unanswered. "Network storage on Linux" to some degree; stop throwing mud, that is totally unfounded and I and alot of other people would disagree with you. I seem to remember something about Veritas supporting Redhat in those list of companies. Not only that but there are many companies already using linux for their Sans. This comment again is extremely laughable.
"Companywide" I tend to take that meaning anything that was on a sun box that can be reproduce on a linux box and retain the same functionality and
uptime will be replaced with said linux boxen. It's also cheaper; would you like water with that tremendously big grain of salt or will some other
beverage accomdate you simply because it is taken place already or soon will be.
Last time I checked eDirectory was nominally available for Linux, and I am sure with a big contract from Wall Street Novell would get to work polishing it up for that platform.
sPh
Actually, the only thing surprising here is that they're talking about it. Wall Street firms usually consider things like this their "competitive advantage" and don't want everyone to know what they're doing. They wouldn't mind if their competitors kept using more expensive proprietary hardware/software solutions...
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
I guess they are playing both sides.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2002/fe b0 2/02-13revolutionpr.asp
I work for one of the largest banks in the world (Top 5) and we almost ditched our entire Windows Server infrastructure in favor of Linux. Why? Not because it wasn't working.
Unlike a lot of MS haters, we know how to use Windows. Strangely enough, when used the way MS intended it works pretty well.
Instead we considered Linux for similar reasons as Merril Lynch. When we asked MS for a deal on licencing our 300+ Windows 2000 Servers the way they did for Windows NT4.0, not only did they say "No" they auditted our current licences and told use we owe them money! They were the ones who sold us the licences in the first place!
So on top of each Windows 2000 Server licence, they want client access licences for EVERY computer (6000+) and a yearly subscription fee for god knows what!
I mean, what's the point of a server if no one can access it? Per-seat licencing for 6000+ workstations?
It wasn't until we weighed it against the cost of redeveloping 120 applications for Linux that we decided to cave. MS knows this. They waited for companies to become dependant on their OS before jacking up the price. What Merril Lynch is doing is not whoop-de-doo! another company went to Linux!, it's truly amazing. For such an enormous organization to revamp on such a huge scale takes cahones.
"You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake."...Tyler Durden
Uh...Marril Lynch is working with terabucks. They NEED some sort of accountability or else they will have to take a loss due to system failure on the chin. What the fuck don't Linuxites understand about accountability? If the seat of your car is attached to the body with gum because someone on the assembly line fucked up and you fly out of the car in a wreck you're going to blame the manufacturer of your car. If a server hiccoughs due to a drunk...fix later bug in some OSS code and millions of insured dollars are lost to the depths of /dev/null, someone is going to be to blame. Kindly insert your retarded sentiments about blame and business up your ass where they belong. It wouldn't be cool for ML to lose an entire country's financial account because some 15 year old KDE contributer was operating on an out of bound pointer.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
1) How do you work around the complete lack of server-side productivity software on Linux servers? By deploying Exchange, you can make scheduling a meeting as easy as sending an email with a time and having everyone click to confirm the meeting, which is then added to everyone's calendar. There is no solution like this without using Exchange (and I've looked.)
You can do this a couple of ways now. One is to use a Outlook with a good IMAP server. Then you configure the clients to publish their free/busy times via WebDAV. This is built into Outlook and works pretty transparently. No costly software on the server at all! This doesn't have all the features that Exchange has, but covers the biggies.
Another more complete approach is to use the software from Bynari. Complete support for Outlook with Unix servers.
2) How do you work around the lack of group policy controls in SAMBA? By this I mean forcing a computer to have the most up-to-date anti-virus software when it logs on to the domain; mapping network drives automatically; downloading OS patches automatically through a local server. AFAIK, Samba can't do any of this as well as a Windows 2000 Server can. And what about Active Directory? LDAP isn't as cohesive a solution if you are running Windows clients.
My impression was that you can use policies with Samba. You just need to use a Windows box to generate the files. Samba also allows you to run scripts on the clients to do whatever you need them to. The scripts can run based on computer name, login name, or domain name. Can be very powerful.
The other conclusion I must draw is that the companies that are migrating to Linux as a workgroup server (i.e. replacing Windows NT/2000 Server with Linux) did not have a cohesive Windows network in the first place. Unfortunately, Linux is nowhere near a solution to Exchange, and it's perhaps 25% of the way to replacing a Windows 2000 primary domain controller's capabilities.
Go to http://www.bynari.net/ and check out their solutions. Very nice.
Samba can work as a PDC quite easily now. It can also allow Unix boxes to join into the domain. Samba takes care of the SID to UID mapping. Very slick. The only thing they don't have completely done right now is Kerberos/AD support. That is coming in Samba 3.0. You can start playing with it right now.
So what servers is Merrill Lynch migrating? Linux does have its core competencies -- web servers; application servers; network storage to some degree -- but they didn't mention what part of the infrastructure they were replacing. I would thus take the words "companywide" with a grain of salt in this case.
Cisco runs all the printers in the company off of Linux. So Linux *can* do file and print quite well.
BTW, you might want to check out a little program called "Directory Administrator." It's a program that manages users in a LDAP directory. The latest version also takes care of managing Samba accounts in LDAP. You get Active Directory without Microsoft.
If you inisist on using outlook, there was a solution: OpenMail but HP decided to kill it. Which, btw, everyone is assuming it's Sun they are replacing (a safe assumption) but with goofy I'll-do-a-merger-to-keep-my-job-and-blame-company- problmes-on-someone-other-that-I Carly at the helm of HP, I wouldn't be surpised if it's HP they need to drop.
Bynari is another calendaring solution that has been mentioned before for Linux. No, it's not open source, free, or even just like exchange; but it works, is virus free, etc.
As for point 2, I've done the virus thing with a cheesy script on each system, and other such lame sysadmin duct tape approaches taking care of windoze network unfriendly boxes.
Your primary point, the question, "just what are they replacing" is a good one and your conclusions are reasonable. My problem is what I sense inbetween the lines. Your point is that exchange makes outlook really easy to deal with and win2k server takes care of windoze boxes easier. Well, ya got me there. Yup, Linux isn't as good as windows in dealing with windows non-sense. I don't suspect it ever will be, EVEN if they were to play nice as Mr. Stallman suggested oh so long ago. You are suggesting that linux will never be ready for IT b/c IT runs windows clients. This doesn't have to be. Things in a linux server/win client enterprise would have to be different. In some ways it would be better and some ways not. There are of course growing pains - I'm sure you're one of the millions that have had to suffer through years and years of M$'s growing pains, mistakes and lies. Now, "their solutions" (ahem) are mostly workable on few commodity (cough, cough) systems - such as the most expensive Intel systems you could buy. That's one approach. Another might be to buy an old unix server (say, a Sun E450) and centralize each offices services to one reliable system.
My point is that the gap between windows and unix/linux is getting smaller in some ways. Unix apps can be easily recompiled to run (slowly) on your pc, and that win box can now pretend to be a newtwork server. Large unix apps can now sort-of slowly run on small linux installations. But the windows boxes can't scale the same was as unix apps, and certianly can't scale as far and will never scale as big. They are different things, and it is very disingenuous for you to say that unix/linux will never cut it in IT b/c it's not windows. Unix can now go big or go small, and it always goes smart and dresses in style. Don't expect to run a better network with out some effort and growing pains - and if you're running windows, always expect to spend a lot more. This why they are replacing unix and you can bet that if this pilot project goes well, windows will be phased out.
Democrats and Republicans only disagree about how to enslave you
"complete lack of server-side productivity"...
Hmm, I can't decide it you are a troll, a MS drone or an idiot. If I wanted to get Exchange server functionality, I might do something like run Lotus Notes (from IBM), OpenMail (from HP), iPlanet (from Sun/AOL) or the product from Bynari Solutions.
As I can't seriously believe you didn't know about these options, I will now deem you to be a MS drone.
I wonder if this will motivate Sun to buy Red Hat?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
...since this came from Forbes. Not exactly where one would expect to find the most accurate information about technology.
When I read:
I found myself laughing out loud.
Has anyone successfully found Microsoft accountable for broken software? Or CA? Or any software vendor for that matter?
Has anyone heard of Red Hat or any other Linux distributor making people pay licensing fees for the use of the software? Of course, Forbes is confusing a license to use the software (the sort of license that Oracle, for example, makes you pay for) with a support contract (which companies like Oracle make you pay for in addition to the usage license).
The day when Red Hat starts asking people to pay for license keys that have to be loaded on each system or pieces of paper that they need to keep on file is the day they should put a big ``Going Out Of Business'' sign in front of their corporate offices.
Not that I'd expect an old money magazines like Forbes to really understand the difference between Linux and other software products but how difficult would it have been for the writer to have called up someone in the OSS movement to get a comment and, perhaps, make sure the article didn't come off sounding like it was written by someone totally clueless.
Jeez...
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
King Canute, king of Denmark, Norway, and -- after a series of battles -- England circa 1015-1035.
The fable is a mistelling of the story. Allegedly Canute had his throne carried to the shore where he sat as the tide came in (he did not drown), in order to prove to flattering courtiers who were saying that he was "so great he could command the tides" that of course he was not, that even kings were as nothing in the face of God's power.
However, I take your point about Linux.
-- Alastair
Financial firms were the primary customer of NeXT Computer (absorbed into Apple, or the other way around). Having been the first commercial object-oriented GUI, it allowed quick development of interfaces for financial software. NeXT would have failed long before, even with Steve's millions.
Fat chance of that. IBM would outbid any attempt by Sun to acquire RH. IBM is using RH for some of its infrastructure/customer support. Sun's only motivation to acquire RH would be to kill it.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Actually the Navy Battleships computer system is running WinNT. Again, these aren't off the shelf WinNT, but pretty customized versions of it.
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
Exactly, there is very little I do not know about setting up individual boxes using Win 2000 or Mac OS. Learning those systems is easy because starting out is easy, not because doing it right is easy. Learning Linux is hard because starting out is hard. I've certainly set up Linux boxes but I have no idea if I have done it correctly because there are as many "best practices" as there are version of distros. When I have to recompile the kernels of a hundred machines, with different hardware configurations, just to incorperate a necessary security feature, my time is gone before I have even put the boxes into production pre-testing.
But then despite all OS maker's claims, there is nothing out there that you can power up and go. The best solution would make all network administrators obsolete. I dont need a button, in the words of Neil Stephenson in "In the Begining was the Command Line" that says "Live". I need a button that says "Start here then go on to more important things".
Linux is an incredibly powerfull OS, but that makes it an end, not a means to an end. It's incredibly functional command line means that you have to understand it all, the moment you first start using it. This is great for people who have been using it for a few years, and horrible if you are new to the platform. I need something I can use right now, not "gee, after spending a few years learning Linux, you will be able to sucurely put a box into production."
There are examples of Linux boxes done right. Tivo comes immediately to mind.
What we need are some task specific distributions:
Fileserver Box, web based administration, bulettproof security. Install this distro on any box and you get an instant fileserver.
Mail server, all the above and again, instant mailserver.
DNS server, Web server, Node for a Cluster, Graphics Workstation.
Hardware and the OS is cheap compared to the time it takes to Set it all up.
Does this sound reasonable? Is it possible? Is anyone currently doing it?
Linux can do all these things, probly better than most operating systems, but getting this kind of functionality out of a universal Distro is exceedingly difficult, because you need to know everything before you can even start.
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
the argument that Linux can be used in place of more established technologies like Unix.
I get a bit annoyed at the way all the PHB rags keep using "Unix" to mean "Unixes other than open source ones". The whole notion of picking between "Linux and Unix" just sounds utterly silly from the outset. It's like asking someone if they use NT or do they use Windows.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
This program is currently in the beta stages, and is intended for developers.
I've deployed it in two offices and it's worked well for light use. Currently, it won't replace Groupwise - but it is less buggy than Exchange. YMMV.
Give it a try. You do have to know what you're doing to install it. (Think database admin)
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
And who is accountable when their in-house application has a bug which costs them millions? Duh, Merrill. Do you think they only operate financial systems that have been produced by other companies or consulting shops??? Who would be responsible if there is a bug in the Linux distribution that cost them millions? Duh, Merrill. With linux, you have the source code available to be corrected. The only drawback is having one less entity to point the finger at.
The accountability issue has nothing to do with finding someone to blame. They're only concerned with IP issues, and this is where moving to Linux can bite them in the ass. You don't have to pay lawyers to figure out whether using a commercial software product could expose them to an IP lawsuit.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
It's not like I boot into Windows, say "Computer, write the year-end fiscal report," and go golfing for the afternoon.
Thankfully, you can do just that with our new project, "Year End Fiscals" for linux. Currently in Alpha, version 0.000121001, it'll allow you to simply type "fiscals -yearend" (at a minimum) and walk away while it generates your documents.
Try it out. Features 1,2,3,5,7-22 and 24-492 inclusive have yet to be implemented, but it will properly accept the first of our command line parameters (of which 132 are planned).
We don't have a completed plan, so if anybody can lend a hand, we'd appreciate it. We need coders, project managers, and economists.
At some point in the distant future, when things are working perfectly, we'll also need documentation specialists. Oh, wait - I've been informed that the coders can write the documentation as they go.
Oh yeah - no reliability, no support.
Note: tongue firmly in cheek!
What gets me is why is switching to Linux such a "last resort" type option? It seems that everyone agrees it will save money and leave a stable system, but people are only willing to make the move in dire straights. It's like having a million-dollar-bill just sitting next to you, and you are just too lazy to grab it.
Engineering and the Ultimate
About two years ago I met some people in the tech dept. at Merrill. Most of them were very aware of the cost savings involved, but were concerned about how well it would integrate in with their trading workstations, which were all SUNs. The software that was run on those workstations was closed-source, and therefore could not be easily ported.
Since that meeting, I learned of two things that happened. One is that Merrill has moved towards Microsoft Windows 2000 for their trading workstations, because software from Instinet, Reuters and Bloomberg is easily available for that platform. The other thing is that SUN has been using strongarm tactics to try and keep Merrill (and probably other companies) buying their hardware.
I don't have any details on what tactics were being employed, but apparently it lead to this switch to Linux.
Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
Intel-based servers may be cheap and all, but I do not look forward to a future where the RISC-based manufacturers, such as Sun, IBM, and SGI, are totally displaced.
********
I don't think this will happen. I think they'll just wise up and start running open, instead of proprietary, operating systems. They'll also have to lower their price to a reasonable level. I don't see this as such a problem.
Engineering and the Ultimate
Hmm, you checked out my homepage, but interestingly enough, you didn't check Netcraft to see what my server was running... ;)
I write these kinds of posts (pro-Microsoft, etc.) for two reasons:
1) People respond with better answers to a post filled with half-truths or a post from someone who they believe is "misinformed";
2) I really do want to know what corporations use if they don't use Microsoft products.
This about it this way: the sales people at Microsoft are out there every day selling their product. They are out there telling your PHB every day that Exchange is better, that SAMBA won't do the half of what Windows 2000 Server will do, and that an all-Windows infrastructure is the way to go.
The real question is: what can you tell your PHB to dispute that?
That's why I write these. Often, the best way to find alternatives is to say something decidedly biased toward one camp. Come on, admit it -- you'd much rather hit "reply" to someone who is wrong or half-right than someone who says "What is the best solution for xxx?" You're also much more likely to provide real, concrete evidence that your product is superior instead of just saying "Hey, Product Y will do xxx! Go check out their homepage."
Now, I can take this information and hand it to the guy who is looking for an Exchange alternative, and I can say, "Look, why don't we check out Products Y and Z, because they might really fit the bill." I can then hand him what is basically a brochure describing migration problems and benefits of changing to the other products. Not only have I provided a solution, but I haven't asked you for bullet points -- I've asked you to prove that your product is better.
It's marketing, pure and simple. I learn infinitely more by writing what I hear from Microsoft salespeople and having Slashdotters prove it wrong than I would asking a question somewhere. Plus, I get to hear and make contact with people who have actually used the product. And in some cases, I get people admitting that the Microsoft solution is the best one out there, in which case that is what I will take back to my customers.
Try it sometime. You might be surprised at what you can learn.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
You cant cross the street without bumping into someone that is a MCSE.
You can't stick your finger up your nose without bumping into a booger either. Doesn't mean I'd want either of them messing with my computer system.
yes.
cpeterso
note that IBM is now doing deals with Suse: "IBM and SuSE Team To Offer a New Generation of Enterprise Ready Linux Services". I bet IBM is trying to scare Red Hat, so IBM can bargain a lower price when they eventually buy out Red Hat.
cpeterso
Errr, can you explain how "They" (chills, fear, it's THEM--the evil miserly RICH!) are going to ruin the GPL by running Linux? Or did your class envy just cut off the circulation to your brain?
First of all, all that stuff is horribly outdated.
DD(x) is the future of the Navy. The current fleet of battleships run a system called AEGIS which runs on top of HP-UX. NT has very limited use in non-tatical systems. You have to understand, the Navy has a _very_ strict QA and development process and systems don't actually get used tactically for almost 10 years it seems.
The future OS to run on DD(x) is up for grabs right now. MS federal systems has teamed up with the Blue Team so if they win, expect to see MS having a bigger role. That's not necessarily a bad thing though because the system is based on Java so not as many bad things can happen. Either way, with the thorough QA process, they should even be able to configure NT to be secure after 10 years.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
The writer was not making a distinction between the services being purchased from RedHat, and the price of the software itself.
She wondered about "large scale licensing issues" and "patent infringement", neither of which are issues at all.
"Free" software, like air, does not eliminate the costs involved with its use. You still have to pump up your own tires, or pay the cost of a compressor, but the air is still "free".
The real bonus is that there is no catch, no hidden costs, and no BSA. I made sure to point this out in my letter to the editor of Forbes. I hope they read it.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Does anyone know what the article means by company-wide? It doesn't go into much detail. Exactly what sort of systems are being replaced by Linux?
I have a website. It's about Macs.
It also replaces a lot of the financial company's NeXT systems. Porting applications from the NextStep API to Cocoa isn't that difficult (witness OmniWeb).
I have a website. It's about Macs.
In any large company you are going to have a large variety of technologies.
Notice how Mr. Vielehr is identified as CTO, but there is the phrase "private client technology" behind that... That's probably a separate division of the company and they do things differently than other divisions.
The way this Linux article is worded, they are replacing some of their systems with Linux... most likely existing Sun systems from the sound of it. But that doesn't preclude that they also have a great many Windows systems, both desktop and server.
"You won't find NT in operation anywhere the word "vital" is important on Wall St. "
For a short time I got stuck on an assignment supporting a trading floor at a large brokerage of one of the big 5 banks. Windows was everywhere. The NASDAQ systems, Bloomberg, Instinet, Bridge, etc. on and on and on. If you don't think any of this was mission critical, I would have loved to hand you the phone when a trader called wondering why our Bridge feed was not updating.
We were also heavily dependent upon Mainframe and Sun components. I don't recall ever seeing OS/2 there. In fact, the only time I've ever seen OS/2 used in a banking environment is as a smart 3270 emulator to connect to a mainframe.
I am curious, if you've never worked in the financial industry why do you purport to provide answers to this guys questions?
For the last several years, I worked in wire and cable manufacturing, where we still use vacuum tubes. They seem to be the perfect amplifiers in high voltage test equipment (up to 150KV.) Interestingly, they are much more reliable than their transistor counterparts, most likely due to the abusive environment of high voltage and corona discharges.
:)
Linux? Yeah, I saw it sneak in just a little. A bit of that was my doing.
I don't work in the financial industry but I know alot of people who do. The traders systems might have been as mission critical as them getting irate with you on the phone; and yes their systems are critical. But that's just front end the real work that goes on behind the scenes usually use unix.. For instance http://about.bloomberg.com/blpsupport is frontend shit.. in the background mostly everything is Unix http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/9906/sunflas h.990615.20.html
I mean this is just shit I'm pulling up from google mind you. So unless everyone is lying.. thats what they run. As for OS/2 you should go to your local bank and look at the tellers screen. You'll either see OS/2 or NT with an open connection with them running Unix to check your accounts. NT, OS/2 for the desktop it's not vital but banks etc at least last time I checked still usually never tend to use NT for their financial stuff. However for instance Chase Manhattan Bank has NT with these little terminals open using a Unix system. Again feel free to check yourself. ATM's use OS/2 etc etc the list goes on. For a while there was a big lets use NT and 2000 and all that.. However the atm's still use the same exact thing.
Yes, proprietary unix and open source unix are very different, and there's a need to have different terms to refer to them. But it's a lie to do it in a way that you call one unix and one not unix. It's insulting to linux, like saying "Would you like to buy a Ford or would you like to buy a truck?"
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
I never said there was no difference. But they should have used different terms to describe that difference, instead of doing it in a way that carries the implication that only proprietary unixen are Unix.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
You misunderstand the problem. Their concern is when they adopt some sort of "GPL"ed product that people later discover that its IP ownership is in question.
They could also have IP that they do not wish to relinquish which might become a problem if it depends on a GPLed component. But that is a separate issue, and not the major concern.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Frankly, who cares about the desktop. Linux won't 'conquer' the desktop without third party support.....
In the comments in the article, they mentioned that their software would be able to scale everywhere -- including the desktop. This leaves me with the feeling that they're expecting to have Linux on the desktop as well (eventually, if not immediately)
For a whole lot of uses, Linux really is ready for the desktop. It may not be up to snuff for the really esotheric high-end desktop publishing, but I can do most of what I really need with Star Office and Gimp, etc.
Abi Word and Koffice may not be quite there, yet (I'm one or two revs behind the current 'stable' releases, there), but they're getting close.
One thing that I'm definitely missing in Abi and K is the ability to properly scale included images.
Please remember that "they can't do it" and "they do it differently" are two different statements. If Linux can easily do something -- but just in a different manner than Windows, then it's not a show stopper. It may even turn out that, once te users get used to doing something the Linux way, that they'll be more happy and productive.
Different is not worse. It's just different.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
Err, arn't the fastest computers in the world clusters of Intel processors?
For that matter, what'd you prefer to have on your desk, a SunBlade "workstation" or a 2GHz PC?
Sun's hardware is basically crap nowadays. 500MHz processor, 128M RAM, IDE disk and a display card with 4M memory don't make a workstation even if you put it in a Sun Pizza box and add top it with a 21" Sun monitor. I'll take the monitor and attach it to a PC thanks!
The real problem is that Linux people are so busy trying to fight Microsoft that they forget what they do well in the first place.
It's partly that some people appear to think that the best way to compete with Windows is to clone Windows apps warts and all. e.g. allowing, even expecting, non techie end users to know what IP addresses and TCP ports are. In order to get their web browser to work.
Marketing people and higher level executives like Windows because that's what they were trained on in school.
There must be some places with some very young senior managers. Most such people would have left school long before even Windows V1 came along. More that they want Windows because Microsoft has promoted it as the only thing, using methods both legal and illegal.
If you have a legcy app the only runs on MS-DOS, or Windows, then you get Microsoft Terminal Server and Citrix. Or you get a Sun desktops, and plop in one of their Intel-PC-On-A-Pci-Cards and run Windows at native speeds. There are other options.
The other alternatives would be running the app in it's own virtual machine which automatically resets the install everytime it is run (using dosemu, wine, vmware, win4lin, plex86, etc) effective against both viruses and Windows "bit rot".
First, you assume that email is the place to make appointments.
This appears indicative of a certain mentality that the way Microsoft have done things is the best way. In some cases they appear to have implimented things in what looks more more the worst way...
Try a portal instead - it's generally more secure, and usually has it's information stored in a database (unlike Exchange2k, which won't have a SQL backend until one or two versions from now).
I'm not convinced there is much point having this information in a complex database. Plain text files with cron scheduled jobs to manage notification (be it email, direct messaging to a workstation, SMS to a phone, etc) and cleaning/archiving old entries would be a far simpler way to do things.
We use a scripting language (Kixstart), kicked off at logon by a batch file on the logon server(s).
IIRC Kixstart originates from within Microsoft. Though they actually provide by default the crude LMSCRIPT...
Must be one of those political things since some of Microsoft's documentation implies that their policy/roaming profile stuff is a subsitute for decent login scripting. Which is utter nonsense.
And who is accountable when their in-house application has a bug which costs them millions? Duh, Merrill. Do you think they only operate financial systems that have been produced by other companies or consulting shops???
Indeed a common reason given for organisations sticking with Windows is in-house applications. Can they point the finger at Microsoft when those fail???
The accountability issue has nothing to do with finding someone to blame. They're only concerned with IP issues, and this is where moving to Linux can bite them in the ass. You don't have to pay lawyers to figure out whether using a commercial software product could expose them to an IP lawsuit.
Isn't going from certainty of risk (see BSA) to the vague possibility of risk a good move?
Or maybe you missed the stories about the ship with the NT-controlled powerplant, and when NT went away, so did control of the engines? Ship had to be towed back to harbor. Big embarrassment
Would have been a bigger embarrassment had this happened in the middle of an actual war. It's a lot easier to bomb a ship which can't manouver.
NEW YORK - Rick Carey has staked his reputation and his job on a project that he concedes is risky--but with potentially huge returns. He is the person in charge of a top-down implementation of Linux software at Merrill Lynch.
Credit Suisse First Boston, which has been working with Linux since late 2000, has replaced some of its Unix technology.
Nasdaq's backend systems at the trading partners are Suns. They use Windows NT as the front end user interface devices. I don't know what they use at NASDAQ itself, but my guess would be Mainframes of some sort due to the trading volume.
But that doesn't matter, the front end systems are just as mission critical as the back end systems. The traders would frequently slam their fists into the keyboard if the backend systems didn't respond immediately. Keyboards were our #1 repair item on the Windows clients.
Indeed a common reason given for organisations sticking with Windows is in-house applications. Can they point the finger at Microsoft when those fail???
The fact that you're asking this means I have to belabour the obvious.
1) You can't always get what you want off the shelf. In particular, a trading company is not going to be able to go to Microsoft or a consulting shop for transaction trading software for its brokers, or some other rarefied application. They have internal software development groups for that very purpose.
2) The key to success is to be able to control your own destiny. Yeah, bureaucracies like to have a finger to point at, but you'd be surprised how many mavericks lurking around who care more about making sure the problem can never arise. The military likes to work this way as well.
What does this have to do with linux? They take on the added support cost, because they save more money on not paying licenses per platfrom.
Isn't going from certainty of risk (see BSA) to the vague possibility of risk a good move?
Since the BSA is a strawman, one could say yes. But its not only about the percentage of risk, its managing the actual harm. There's legal expenses, then possible lawsuit awards, and it could be extremely disruptive to the company to redevelop the software without the offending code. Look at Arthur Anderson; they were going to make lots of money and keep a client by risking a little impropriety. Its not enough that the possibility of a problem is remote.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
"I don't work in the financial industry but I know alot of people who do."
r ontiers .htm
...
Yeah, that's what I figured. This of course makes you an "expert."
"But that's just front end the real work that goes on behind the scenes usually use unix."
No, most of the back end resides on mainframes.
"I mean this is just shit I'm pulling up from google mind you. "
I thought you had friends?
"So unless everyone is lying.. thats what they run."
Press releases don't tell the full story.
"As for OS/2 you should go to your local bank and look at the tellers screen. You'll either see OS/2 or NT with an open connection with them running Unix to check your accounts. "
Banks don't use Unix, they use Mainframes. Those systems were built 30-40 years ago, and the cost of migrating is more than simply maintaining them. That, and the Unix systems just don't have the I/O capacity to handle the transaction volume.
But as I said, yes OS/2 is used in banks, but primarily as a smart 3270 terminal. It allows them to easily pull the data with a screen scrape and print out a customized form for the customer.
"However for instance Chase Manhattan Bank has NT with these little terminals open using a Unix system."
Again, I'd be surprised if they used Unix in that capacity.
"ATM's use OS/2 etc etc the list goes on."
Again because of the easy connection into the Mainframe systems that run the ATM networks. I also happen to have a friend who used to work for the Shazam network, so I'm familiar with that. I also have a friend who worked for an ATM manufacturer out of Omaha.
Not all ATM's use OS/2, most are actually moving away from that now towards embedded Windows, etc.
I can use google.com as well:
http://special.northernlight.com/banking/f
...According to Jerry Silva, a senior analyst with the Needham, MA- based TowerGroup, IBM OS/2 operating systems are phased out in the next few years, Windows NT and especially Windows 2000 will enter the forefront, giving banks a chance to ask, "'OK, what can we do with the ATMs now to make them more effective?"
Today I happen to work in the mortgage industry, and we're heavily reliant upon Windows and Unix. But that's primarily because mortgages is a fairly new industry just spun up over the past 20 years.
Ohwell.
How about we agree to disagree and move on. There are much more useful things we could debate over. I'm going by heresay and I've never worked in a financial institution this is what I've heard from friends. If you'd like you can debate with them, we are conducting a coding fest this weekend so I'll give them this link and let them respond.
All of that exists.
If you want a box with Linux pre-installed, support a Linux OEM (not Dell or Compaq or Pricewatch.) If you want support buy it from Redhat or SuSE. Don't download and burn and complain.
And try Linux again. Installs are a lot prettier than they were 3 years ago.
just cut and paste this macro into your favorite terminal emulator and send the message. Pine will parse the macro, convert it into code that sendmail uses to manage the message, and viola, you can have your meeting:
.create_email(%msg(rtrn_rcpt)
.schedul e_app(app1[], sendmail, 12)
Hey Bob,
Let's do lunch at 1:00 tomorrow. If you can make it, let me know. If you think you'll forget, run a cron job to make something pop up on your screen every couple of minutes, that's high tech, eh?
-aaron
ps. Ignore those couple of lines of gibberish at the top, they're just there to make someone who thinks there something fancy about hitting a button labeled "Accept" instead of "Reply". We've already discussed the idea of pop-ups. Haha!
I click on the tarfile (or a ZIP file, for that matter, only it doesn't compress as well as gzip or bzip2) in my Konqueror window, and it pops up a GUI archive manager. The same thing happens in Nautilus. And has done for years.
A manager would call it an archive file anyway. Or even a ZIPfile, out of habit.
Do you even use this software you speak so authoritatively for?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Look, computers are a tool not a religion.
Wall St does not give a shit about your little anti-Microsoft rants, they are going to use tools which serve the purpose for what they need. And right now Windows happens to make the best platform for user interfaces, as well as the best platform for web application servers. So they get used in those roles frequently.
Unix and the Mainframes also have roles that they are well suited towards. The great thing is, you can interconnect all of these machines together and get best of many worlds.
Heh, don't get mad, get facts.. I have nothing against Microsoft except their practices as an illegal monopoly. You might wanna read more of my posts on your free time. As for wall st, I'd love to see you go somewhere with this idea that NT is running financials. NT in every datacenter eh?? heh
Come on.. seriously.