Slashdot Mirror


Computer Glitch Halts Seattle New Year's Fireworks

supersat writes "At the stroke of midnight New Year's Eve, Seattle's fireworks show ground to a halt. The source of the problem is reported to be a corrupted file that wasn't checked until the last minute. After two reboots, the fireworks had to be detonated manually. And yes ... one blog commenter, claiming to have worked on prior shows, said that the shows run on Windows."

202 comments

  1. Runs on Windows? by Oligonicella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, unless it was an operating system problem and not bad data or bad programming, what's the point in mentioning that other than childish bashing?

    1. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You must be new here.

    2. Re:Runs on Windows? by heinousjay · · Score: 2, Funny

      Perhaps an analogy:

      If you're a straight guy looking to masturbate, what's the difference between two chicks getting it on, and two dudes?

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    3. Re:Runs on Windows? by bersl2 · · Score: 1

      The childish bashing is still funny, as long as it doesn't get too serious.

    4. Re:Runs on Windows? by Daltin · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Obviously, you go for what suits you best, and now you two choices:

      1. You can either be a childish homophobe

      2. You can say nothing.

    5. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woosh.

    6. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So /. just takes the word from some blogger that "claims" to have worked on the show?

      How much you want to bet if this blogger said it ran on Linux, /. would have demanded more proof or conveniently forgotten about that blog?

    7. Re:Runs on Windows? by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 0, Redundant

      My thoughts precisely. But hey, childish bashing is A-OK if Microsoft is the target round here...

    8. Re:Runs on Windows? by v1 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It says "BSOD" in several places in the article. Unless you are writing bad drivers, (which I'd admit may have been an issue, seeing as they are interacting with hardware, the fireworks squibbs) software or data problems should not be able to cause an OS crash unless your OS sucks. (though the squibb board was likely USB controlled)

      Speculating wildly, it appears to be a case of where windows just randomly corrupts something on the HD and this time it just happened to nail something the OS needed, and was only discovered when they ran it live.

      Really though, anything automated like this that cannot be repeated should be designed to be testable as completely as possible, and should be tested several times in advance. Fireworks shows should have a fully functional computer system that runs completely to the end live, tested. The squibb board should have LEDs, one for each squibb, that light up as the computer fires them, so you can dry run it as many times as you like, watching the LED board to make sure everything goes off as planned. A security key on the board provides power to the squibbs themselves, so you can do a complete live run through the entire computer controlled show as many times as needed before the showmaster inserts and turns the key to heat up the squibbs and they just press the "do it again" button on the computer. There is no excuse for this.

      But can't say for sure that even THAT would have helped matters in this case. Windows is known to spontaneously corrupt its OS files, and this could have very easily happened during their final test at 11:40 pm. But for something as big as this I would expect no less than redundant computers. It's software for christ sakes. Put it on two machines. The squibb board was likely serial or usb anyway so you could even drag your laptop from home as a backup because the computer has no special hardware installed. Again there is no excuse for this failure, unless your squibb board catches on fire or something like that which you can't double up on.

      Anyone quoting me for a big show that tried to tell me they were providing a single (windows or otherwise) computer the whole thing hinged on and there was no hot spare, would be promptly shown the DOOR.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    9. Re:Runs on Windows? by digitalhermit · · Score: 4, Funny

      nah. just good natured bashing..

      Like when your co-worker drops his coffee on his lap.. you don't hate the co-worker, but you have lots of fun at his expense. "Coffee's hot, I bet."

    10. Re:Runs on Windows? by dasOp · · Score: 3, Insightful
      To be honest, I'd much rather read stories in the line of

      "The magnificent fireworks display in <insert city here> was actually controlled and detonated from a laptop running <insert favorite distro here> with a soon-to-be foss-application written in <insert programming language of choice here>. <online mag of choice> had a talk with the man responsible, <insert name here>."


      Anders
    11. Re:Runs on Windows? by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...because Seattle is the home of Microsoft. There's a certain irony in this story.

    12. Re:Runs on Windows? by mikelieman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Seconded. If you're a PRO, and your Show Control is important, then you have duplicates in place for everything which would stop the show.

      I wonder if you can have the manual-firing and show control up at the same time, so that, although it runs automatically, there's someone still hitting the contacts to fire them by hand. Once they see the show-control computer is running right, they can stop doing it manually, but still follow the cues in-case it goes down again...

      --
      Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
    13. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I didn't this it was that good either. A better analogy would be:

      buggy code on linux == a guy and a girl
      buggy code on windows == a guy and a guy

      As your joke stands now, you invocation of the girl/girl paradigm is confusing.

    14. Re:Runs on Windows? by gregorio · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Windows is known to spontaneously corrupt its OS files
      No, it is not. Next question.
    15. Re:Runs on Windows? by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      Home server is ;)

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    16. Re:Runs on Windows? by farker+haiku · · Score: 1

      It says "BSOD" in several places in the article. Unless you are writing bad drivers, (which I'd admit may have been an issue, seeing as they are interacting with hardware, the fireworks squibbs) software or data problems should not be able to cause an OS crash unless your OS sucks. (though the squibb board was likely USB controlled)

      I'm just curious... what drugs are you on? I just searched both articles and neither said anything about a BSOD except for a comment half way through one of the article. I mean, bashing windows and microsoft is easy. At least try to be accurate though.

      -1 another insipid post moderated insightful?

      --
      Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
    17. Re:Runs on Windows? by kbg · · Score: 1
    18. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean like the childish bashing of novell in the other article?

    19. Re:Runs on Windows? by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What is homophic in saying that a straight guy won't get excited seeing a vid of two guys masturbating? Come on! don't be so defensive, the world is not on a hunt for you, man!
      I am not for discriminating against homos, pans, assexuals or whatever, but I can't either agree with extreme PC, it's a bit too much on the paranoid side for me.
      Peace!

      --
      Your ad could be here!
    20. Re:Runs on Windows? by supersat · · Score: 1

      Well, frankly, that was the first thing EVERYONE wondered, even among the mildly computer-literate, especially since Seattle is Microsoft's backyard. It's easy (and fun) to make fun of Microsoft's legendary reliability, even if they don't deserve it.

      Now, a comment on a blog is hardly trustworthy, so the second thing pointing this out does is put the claim out there for actual reporters to verify, if they choose to do so. It might even stir up some comments by Microsoft or the company hired to do the show.

      More than likely, though, the OS had nothing to do with it.

    21. Re:Runs on Windows? by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Care to list all the ext2/ext3 file corruption bugs that have existed in Linux over the past 5 years?

    22. Re:Runs on Windows? by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 1

      Never mind that an operating system which crashes is a common source of file corruption. But ok! Yeah, you're right! it's the fault of programmers! They corrupted their own little f*cking files. After all, who here among us has ever seen Windows crashing while it was flushing the fucking write-back cache?

      --
      Your ad could be here!
    23. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Who modded this insightful?

      - The article doesn't mention BSODs once.
      - Windows is not known to 'spontaneously corrupt' OS files any more than Linux is.

      Parent is just a fucking liar posting for karma and the moronic sheep moderators fell for it hook, line and sinker.

    24. Re:Runs on Windows? by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 1

      Don't we agree that if it DOES corrupt files, there's no reason we must believe it won't corrupt system files, like the registry?
      Actually, it would be rather nasty if we found out that the "Periodical Windows File Corruption Routines" spared system files.

      --
      Your ad could be here!
    25. Re:Runs on Windows? by someone300 · · Score: 1

      Google this:
      Windows XP could not start because the following file is missing or corrupt: \WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\CONFIG\SYSTEM

      That seems to happen quite randomly, not sure of the cause, but it's happened to me on three (of five) systems, after a clean shutdown and all that. One of those times it happened on holiday, when I didn't have time to fix it, and another time it happened just as I was about to leave to a LAN party. :D Lucky eh?

    26. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it is not. It is known to corrupt data files, not OS files.

    27. Re:Runs on Windows? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Windows is not known to 'spontaneously corrupt' OS files any more than Linux is.
      Recently it is.
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    28. Re:Runs on Windows? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Windows is not known to 'spontaneously corrupt' OS files any more than Linux is.
      Recently it is.
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    29. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone quoting me for a big show that tried to tell me they were providing a single (windows or otherwise) computer the whole thing hinged on and there was no hot spare, would be promptly shown the DOOR.


      Ah. Wouldn't it be nice to have all that money for all that redundancy. I'm not a pyrotechnician (costs way too much in public liability insurance), but I do work alongside them from time to time as an entertainment/event lighting technician. And having worked on these big shows - there's not as much money for that sort of thing as you might think.

      As with all things, it always costs more to put these things on than the promoter/joe public suspects - and when a fireworks show that only lasts a few minutes is already running in to the millions, the promoter generally is not looking at what redundancy etc is being spec-ed. They're typically more interested in how many bangs and colours there are going to be.

      In the lighting world, high-end software tends to cost about $60,000. Considering most pyro jobs are still manually controlled, I reckon you could find any computerized control software for pyros costing upwards of $100,000.

      Even in the lighting world, which in most show environments is more critical to the continuation of the show than the pyros, it is unheard of to have any redundancy except on the biggest touring shows. Even in those situations, the extent of the redundancy tends to be limited to two control desks with a physical switch that switches which console is connected to the data stream to the dimmers / motorized lights / video screen media servers / smoke machines / etc.
      There is still no backup should a dimmer die, or a media server fall over, or someone cuts through the data cable.

      I don't disagree that redundancy would be great - but those with the money are after getting as much spectacle for their buck - you're not going to get the gig if you quote a system with 2 controllers with automatic fall-back redundancy, a backup generator for the control booth, two data links to every launch position,... but only 80% the number of rockets as the other guy. So we quote the best system we can, usually with no or limited redundancy, and cross our fingers that it'll work - which 95% of the time it does. The other 5% of the time, we do our best to remain invisible to the promoter immediately after the gig. :-)

      That said, if the problem here is that someone didn't test their show file, or made a last minute change to it without keeping a backup of the old stable one - well, they owe the rest of the crew a beer after the gig.
    30. Re:Runs on Windows? by LizardKing · · Score: 1

      Would you care to list them? Apart from errors caused by people using old ext3 journals after they'd accidentally mounted a partition as ext2 and modified it, I'm aware of no recent reports of file corruption bugs. There was an invalid inode size problem about a year ago that could cause a system hang, but as I understood it ext2 and ext3 couldn't create that invalid size itself.

    31. Re:Runs on Windows? by murdocj · · Score: 1

      Well, I've been programming on Windows since 3.1, and UNIX since 1973, and I've seen as much file corruption on *nix as I have on Windows. Sorry to rain on your parade.

    32. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "you invocation of the girl/girl paradigm is confusing."

      You must be gay.

    33. Re:Runs on Windows? by AgentPaper · · Score: 4, Funny
      I am not for discriminating against homos, pans, assexuals or whatever...

      Pardon me, but your Freudian slip is showing...

      --
      First rule of trauma: Bleeding always stops.
    34. Re:Runs on Windows? by stuboogie · · Score: 1

      "That seems to happen quite randomly, not sure of the cause, but it's happened to me on three (of five) systems"

      Really? If it happens "randomly" and it has affected 60% of your windows boxes, then I would think there would be a massive uproar throughout the corporate world over this issue.

      I think it is more likely that it is not so "random" and more probable that it is linked to something YOU are doing on your windows boxes.
      I have Googled this problem and it appears to happen after improper shutdowns contrary to what you state. If it occurs after a normal shutdown then it is hardware related and not Windows related.

      Perhaps you need to check the hardware on your machines and quit posting FUD.

    35. Re:Runs on Windows? by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      Given file corruption as equally probable, the most fragile system is windows (the insane registry), followed by unix/linux/OSX (a stabler OS and journaled FS help). Good ol' macOS beats em all because it could keep an arbitrary number of system folders (=OS installations) in the same partition, and switching between them IIRC could be done at startup. No system file was a single point of failure.

      But even this is irrelevant because as you should know and other slahdotters state, file corruption under windows primarily occurs because of software problems not hardware glitches.

      Last but not least, have you ever got a ".doc of death" which crashes some/all office installations? Maybe something similar happened and it was misreported as a corrupted file. The file could be well formed and the parsing lib buggy.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    36. Re:Runs on Windows? by phoenixwade · · Score: 2, Informative

      So /. just takes the word from some blogger that "claims" to have worked on the show?

      How much you want to bet if this blogger said it ran on Linux, /. would have demanded more proof or conveniently forgotten about that blog? More Proof?

      How about this:

        The New tears Seattle show was produced and directed by Pyro Spectaculars. who list the Seattle shows as well as the Olympics, and a number of other very well known fireworks shows as events they've managed. They do not, however, list the software they use on their website.

        On the Infinity Visions website we find news items listing the same shows as being managed by the software they market, including the 2005 Seattle show. The software is windows only (it is vista compatible, now, the website says)

        In addition, though I don't have a screen shot for you, The discovery channel special on the new fireworks extraviganza's (Featuring Pyro Spectaculars) does show how they layout the show on a computer (a windows interface, beyond question). The bloggers comment that they used a Windows based system in the past (as recently as Summer of 2006 is provable.) can readily be confirmed.

      Pyro Spectacular may have switched to a non-windows based system since the Olympics, After using a solid product that they've depended on for years to handle explosives is conceivable but it seems unlikely. It does happen, after all; I know of a graphics shop in town that swore by dreamweaver and switched to GoLive this year, just prior to starting a major web project.... With the obvious results (cost overruns, missed deadlines, and such) I'm not hammering GoLive, I use it by preference, in fact, but a major switch before a big job is stupid, and yet companies still do it. So it's POSSIBLE the production shop switched in the last 18 months, but it's ratehr unlikely.

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    37. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this spontaneous, and how are these files OS-related?

      Home Server corrupts files that you have backed up, and only if you attempt to edit those files as they are instead of restoring them first.

    38. Re:Runs on Windows? by Locutus · · Score: 1

      that is left to Patch Tuesday events. ;-)

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    39. Re:Runs on Windows? by Locutus · · Score: 1

      Could it have been that the show was written/scheduled in Microsoft PowerPoint and a corrupt .ppt file caused the OS to crash? ;-)

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    40. Re: Runs on Windows? by atrocious+cowpat · · Score: 1

      " I know of a graphics shop in town that swore by dreamweaver and switched to GoLive this year, just prior to starting a major web project...."

      When you say "this year", are you sure you didn't mean "the year before last"? Why would anyone switch from Dreamweaver to GoLive in the year Adobe announced to ditch GoLive for Dreamweaver? GL isn't even included in CS3 anymore, and Adobe heartily reccomends switching to DW.

      Now, switching from GL to DW probably wouldn't be such a hot idea just prior to a big project, but from DW to GL? Now? That sounds insane.

      --
      sig? Oh, that sig...
    41. Re:Runs on Windows? by mlwmohawk · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Well, unless it was an operating system problem and not bad data or bad programming, what's the point in mentioning that other than childish bashing?

      In an isolated discussion, your comment makes complete sense, but in reality Windows is really at fault here, and if it isn't, we are merely applying blame based on probability. You can say it is a problem with "this" or "that," but in the end, these sorts of things are very common on Windows and that leaves me frequently wondering why these sorts of things are always happening on Windows.

      Similarly, it is like MySQL. Sure, a *bad* programmer may do something wrong, and get a "cannot access database" message, but in my surfing experience, it is typically MySQL.

      So, be it programmer error, OS error, there MUST be something inherent in Windows that makes this stuff common. Its too easy to dismiss it as something else, sooner or later you have to look at the lowest common denominator, and that is the Windows platform.

    42. Re:Runs on Windows? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      It also says it's the first problem they've had in 14 years.

      But honestly, from a neutral observer of channel 5 in a bowling alley, I didn't notice any problem with the fireworks and I can guarantee nobody else there did, either. They said it was 'out of sync with the music', well, we couldn't hear the music, and the big blast happened at exactly midnight.

    43. Re:Runs on Windows? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Redmond is the home of Microsoft. Redmond's across the lake, north-east from Bellevue. But, uh, nice try? I guess?

    44. Re:Runs on Windows? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Wow, one day in and you're really making the most of 2008.

    45. Re:Runs on Windows? by someone300 · · Score: 1

      On a sample size of something as small as 5 systems, as I quoted, you can't make very certain estimates about the 'true' probability of such an event occuring. It could be 0.1% per box of average use, and I might just be very unlucky. To be honest, I wasn't even trying to say "Windows crashes all the time" or any such thing. I was trying to say that there if there is a file that a corruption bug, it could potentially make a computer unbootable by playing with that file. Coupled with an interesting piece of information about how the things tends to happen to me at the worst time. :)

      As for it happening on systems other than mine, I have observed it on corporate computers, and no it doesn't cause any problems, since there are usually lots of spare boxes lying around that you can just swap over. From my time working in an office on tech support, of the 1000 computers, about 2 or 3 would screw up every day in some way or other* and you'd just restore the hard drive from an image and give them a temp box to use in the meantime. Usually you'd just restore it without even looking into the problem, since usually all investigating it would do is waste time. If it didn't fix the problem, you might investigate it then. I understand this may be a different experience in different sized offices, nevertheless I'm just stating what I observed: unbootable bugs on client computers don't really cause too much of a problem. Servers also do have unbootable bugs sometimes, but usually for important things you have some level of redundancy or at least spares with the ability to get things back working quickly again.

      As to why it happened frequently on my computers, it could be anything, from minor hardware problems to small bugs in the write caching code on Windows. I don't think it's anything I'm doing, unless you count using the computer far more often than a lot of other people. I always shut down the computer correctly, though they *do* sometimes crash on shutdown, but it's rare I notice this since I'm usually rebooting rather than turning it off completely. By default, XP reboots when it BSODs.

      NT may be fairly stable, but the idea that all BSODs are because of the hardware or your vendor drivers is deeply flawed. Microsoft and Windows bugs do cause BSODs. To be fair, many of them only occur on certain hardware and usually corporate hardware (as in, basic graphics acceleration and such) is the most stable for running Windows. Remember: a bug that only exhibits itself on certain hardware can still be your/Microsoft's fault, since the hardware that exposes the bug may be using a particular set of features that causes the problem. Hardware-dependent does not imply malfunctioning hardware.

      The hardware on my machines seems fine, memcheck passes, the hard drives are good and Linux never crashes (since I got nVidia cards, that is). You might want to reconsider your view that Windows has no bugs that can cause data corruption (as identified in the statement "If it occurs after a normal shutdown then it is hardware related and not Windows related."). It is possible it was my hardware, though at the same time, given the reliability of the systems when running Linux, which I use far more, it seems more likely to be something to do with the operating system.

      * Doesn't necesarrily mean unbootable, but possibly icons not appearing on the desktop or some other strange issue.

    46. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not gay; confused.

    47. Re:Runs on Windows? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      How is this spontaneous
      Spontanious because it happens randomly with writes

      and how are these files OS-related?
      Use your imagination. I already off the top of my head have a few ideas with a sharing the wrong sort of paths.

      Home Server corrupts files that you have backed up, and only if you attempt to edit those files as they are instead of restoring them first.
      Incorrect. Home server ends up corrupting files that are on file shares that are meant to be used for backup purposes - this does not mean people have used them for backup uses. It doesn't matter if the files were originally a backup or not.

      As for my previous comment. I was being semi-joking when I said it.
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    48. Re:Runs on Windows? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Well, unless it was an operating system problem and not bad data or bad programming, what's the point in mentioning that other than childish bashing?"

      I couldn't connect to my webserver last night during a power outage. Incidentally, that server runs on Linux. Giggle giggle snort. My niche with mod points will love that!

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    49. Re:Runs on Windows? by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      > Could it have been that the show was written/scheduled in Microsoft PowerPoint and a corrupt .ppt file caused the OS to crash? ;-)

      Could be, but then the news would be that the previous 13 editions everything worked well.

      Seriously, of the last two presentations I saw, both involving dvd video playback on XP, one failed miserably in front of 100 people, the second had periodic glitches (maybe the screensaver kicking in?) in front of 600 people.

      Speaking as someone who just discovered his mplayer isn't finding a lib (BUT on debian unstable).

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    50. Re:Runs on Windows? by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      OH Mighty debian sid, sorry to have offended your reputation!!! it was my fault. How silly of me, i had added repository to sid and installed video related stuff. I just updated mplayer and everything is working again.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    51. Re:Runs on Windows? by Aellus · · Score: 1

      True, but I'd be willing to bet that most of the thousands of fireworks displays that go off without a hitch around the world are run off of a Windows box too. This sounds like user error, and/or shitty software. It could have just as easily been shitty software written for .

    52. Re:Runs on Windows? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      I dont even need any fingers to count those.

      Ext3 is flawless unless your doing something very low level or the physical media has a problem.
      Even then its pretty damn good.
      It wont one day just corrupt data unlike Windows (Home server at least).

    53. Re:Runs on Windows? by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      Care to list all the ext2/ext3 file corruption bugs that have existed in Linux over the past 5 years? Few and far between. I recall 2.4.15 was a dontuse because buffer flush to disk was completely broken, which broke all file systems. Oops. Fixed within hours, obviously never shipped by any Linux distribution. A few years earlier there was a corruption bug on file tails that could be triggered by certain access patterns, the only known example of which was inn (internet news). The 2.6.19 kernel was a dud release with a subtle dirty page bug that Linus personally tracked down and killed over a 10 day period. There were occasional bugs in ext3 that came up a few years back, mostly only triggerable by continuously hitting the power switch under heavy load. Nothing that fsck could not fix. In all my years of using Linux on lots of machines, hitting them hard, I never hit a single Ext3 bug myself. It's that stable.
      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    54. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redmond%2C_Washington

      Redmond is a city in King County, Washington, USA. It is situated on the eastern edge of the Seattle urban area, in what is known as the Eastside.

    55. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How embassasing for you Americans. You really do need to take a trip down under to see how it's done :)

      Here, watch and learn
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgBAZXpVl-E

      What bunch of losers :)

    56. Re:Runs on Windows? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and then there was a long awkward pause punctuated by booing from the crowd. And then it started again.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    57. Re: Runs on Windows? by phoenixwade · · Score: 1

      " I know of a graphics shop in town that swore by dreamweaver and switched to GoLive this year, just prior to starting a major web project...."

      When you say "this year", are you sure you didn't mean "the year before last"? Why would anyone switch from Dreamweaver to GoLive in the year Adobe announced to ditch GoLive for Dreamweaver? GL isn't even included in CS3 anymore, and Adobe heartily reccomends switching to DW.

      Now, switching from GL to DW probably wouldn't be such a hot idea just prior to a big project, but from DW to GL? Now? That sounds insane. Heh, when I said "This year" I meant 2007, and yes, it was insane for a number of reasons....

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    58. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://kerneltrap.org/node/515/1821 In 2.4.20-pre5 an optimisation was made to the ext3 fsync function which can very easily cause file data corruption at unmount time. This was first reported by Nick Piggin on November 29th (one day after 2.4.20 was released, and three months after the bug was merged. Unfortunate timing) This only affects filesystems which were mounted with the `data=journal' option. Or files which are operating under `chattr -j'. So most people are unaffected. The problem is not present in 2.5 kernels. The symptoms are that any file data which was written within the thirty seconds prior to the unmount may not make it to disk. A workaround is to run `sync' before nmounting. The optimisation was intended to avoid writing out and waiting on the inode's buffers when the subsequent commit would do that anyway. This optimisation was applied to both data=journal and data=ordered modes. But it is only valid for data=ordered mode. In data=journal mode the data is left dirty in memory and the unmount will silently discard it.

    59. Re:Runs on Windows? by CodyRazor · · Score: 0

      The amusing thing is most men would get aroused but two men, because its sexual activity of some sort. We're wired to get turned on by any sexual activity, even if its not your bag, baby.

      --
      So Skulldilocks threw acid on the schoolchildrens' faces, cause somebody from the bible told her to do it!
    60. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We were looking for bugs in the past 5 years (for the gp's random request). Thats more than 5 years old, and says that "most people are unaffected".

      Close though.

    61. Re:Runs on Windows? by Workaphobia · · Score: 1

      It's a good indication that the software wasn't engineered to be particularly highly reliable. You wouldn't use Windows to run a nuclear power plant safety-critical system. I'm not saying that this situation demands such reliability, but it's arguably relevant.

      --
      Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
    62. Re:Runs on Windows? by lpq · · Score: 1

      If there was a problem, how would you know it hadn't been caused by the OS? It's not as if you can examine the source. With the file-corruption on Windows Home Server, they got caught.

    63. Re:Runs on Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are referencing wikipedia to try and say that Redmond is within Seattle. Technically, the wikipedia article is incorrect as the name of this urban area depends on who is referencing it as there is no official name to this as a whole. In some official documentation it is referenced as the Seattle-King County urban area.

      Even so, TFA refenences the city of Seattle which is not the same as the Seattle urban area you reference. Nice jump in your logic, too bad it doesn't work.

      Oh and FIFY.

    64. Re:Runs on Windows? by dzelenka · · Score: 1

      It wasn't mentioned unless BSOD stands for Big Sky Of Darkness!

      --
      Bah!
    65. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Windows is known to spontaneously corrupt its OS files

      Ya.. ok. I guess fanboism knows no bounds..

    66. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      So you're saying they copied the file from a backup on Windows Home server?

    67. Re:Runs on Windows? by kbg · · Score: 1

      It isn't mentioned what version of windows was used or what they did, so I can't be sure but anyway according to:

      http://support.microsoft.com/kb/885936

      By simply using Windows XP and then share the file on a windows network you can possibly corrupt the file.

    68. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      By simply using Windows XP and then share the file on a windows network you can possibly corrupt the file.

      I see you can't even be bothered to read the KB articles you link, or your write political ads for a living. Anything to bash MS I suppose.

    69. Re:Runs on Windows? by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      I had a huge list, but they got corrupted when my Windows PC crashed. :)

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    70. Re:Runs on Windows? by kbg · · Score: 1

      And how do you interpret the KB article differently? As I understand it:

      1. You share the file or create the file on a Windows server
      2. You use a Windows XP client to access the file.
      3. You use a program with the specific behaviour to edit/create the file for example "Microsoft linker"
      See: http://ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21180484

    71. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Yes, its the step 3 that makes it a smaller issue that you would like. Its not randomly corrupting files, it happens under a specific set of conditions.

    72. Re:Runs on Windows? by kbg · · Score: 1

      Yes but it is an OS level bug, since there is no list of affected programs in the KB article you
      can't really be sure if the program you are using has the possibility to corrupt your files.
      So from a users point of view this is basically "randomly corrupting files" when it happens.

      This is Microsoft we are talking about this company basically has unlimited amounts of money to throw at a problem. Instead of wasting time with useless features like DRM and eye candy (Vista) and UI changes for patent purposes only (Office 2007) they should instead fix core critical bugs in their OS and given that they have unlimited amount of money and resources I would expect their OS release to be almost 100% bug free.

    73. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Yes but it is an OS level bug, since there is no list of affected programs in the KB article you
      can't really be sure if the program you are using has the possibility to corrupt your files.
      So from a users point of view this is basically "randomly corrupting files" when it happens.


      There's no list because MS can't possibly know what programs do or don't setup the scenario. From a user's perspective, it doesn't seem like this is a huge deal, because you'd think that it would be all over, but it's not.

      This is Microsoft we are talking about this company basically has unlimited amounts of money to throw at a problem.

      No, they don't have unlimited amounts of money, and you don't know what their other expendatures are.

      Instead of wasting time with useless features like DRM and eye candy (Vista) and UI changes for patent purposes only (Office 2007) they should instead fix core critical bugs in their OS and given that they have unlimited amount of money and resources I would expect their OS release to be almost 100% bug free.

      Personally I like the eye candy and the ribbon in 2007. The ribbon I find especially useful. That said, if you actually read the KB article, you'll see there's a hotfix available. I would say it's fixed and the fix is undergoing testing.

      If Linux can't be almost 100% bug free, why do you expect MS to be able to, especially with all the free (although of questionable quality) labor that Linux gets? That just seems unrealistic.

    74. Re:Runs on Windows? by kbg · · Score: 1

      There's no list because MS can't possibly know what programs do or don't setup the scenario. From a user's perspective, it doesn't seem like this is a huge deal, because you'd think that it would be all over, but it's not.
      We don't know if it is a huge deal or not how often do you check all your files for corruption?
      I have sometimes had my windows core files just corrupt for no reason, how am I supposed to know if this was the reason or not?

      No, they don't have unlimited amounts of money, and you don't know what their other expendatures are.
      Well we do know that they had at least $14 billion in profit this year. If that isn't a shitload of money then I don't know what is
      and...uhm...maybe they could use their profits..I don't know...to actually make their products better?

      Personally I like the eye candy and the ribbon in 2007. The ribbon I find especially useful.
      You do realise the only reason for the ribbon interface change in 2007 is to keep a patent stranglehold on open source competitors? Ease of use had nothing to do with it.

      That said, if you actually read the KB article, you'll see there's a hotfix available. I would say it's fixed and the fix is undergoing testing.
      Yes the fix has been in testing for at least 4 months. I am glad they didn't waste their time adding DRM to Vista, bribing ISO members or anything like that.

      If Linux can't be almost 100% bug free, why do you expect MS to be able to, especially with all the free (although of questionable quality) labor that Linux gets? That just seems unrealistic.
      Uhm maybe the reason could be that Linux doesn't have shitload of money?
      If Linux could hire developers to do units tests and quality assurance for that money. I can guarantie that it would be almost 100% bug free.

      It isn't even about the money it is about priorities. Do you but priority on fixing bugs and making your product actually better than the competitor, or do you focus on useless and obtrusive things like DRM and fighting your competitors with underhand tactics?
    75. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      We don't know if it is a huge deal or not how often do you check all your files for corruption?
      I have sometimes had my windows core files just corrupt for no reason, how am I supposed to know if this was the reason or not?


      I'm sure lots of people save files and then never, ever open again. Sure. Also, it only occurs over a FILE SHARE, so why would something in \windows be 1) shared and 2) overwritten through said share and 3) using the file mode specified in the KB article? Not likely. More likely is a crappy harddrive or stupid user.

      Well we do know that they had at least $14 billion in profit this year. If that isn't a shitload of money then I don't know what is
      and...uhm...maybe they could use their profits..I don't know...to actually make their products better?


      Hmm, $14 billion sounds like a finite number to me. And again, THEY HAVE A HOTFIX! So it does sound like they used some of that money to fix the problem, and are spending more to verify it doesn't break something else.

      You do realise the only reason for the ribbon interface change in 2007 is to keep a patent stranglehold on open source competitors? Ease of use had nothing to do with it.

      Huh? How does the ribbon do anything to open source competitors? Believe it or not, I actually find it useful as well! But I guess that's just luck, because somehow their patent is keeping down the poor open source developers.

      Yes the fix has been in testing for at least 4 months. I am glad they didn't waste their time adding DRM to Vista, bribing ISO members or anything like that.

      Wow, two fallacies in as many sentences. First, why can't they fix this issue AND add DRM? Do you think it would result in a fix faster for every developer to focus on ONE problem? I sure as hell don't. More isn't always better. Second, you assume that the people "bribing" ISO members are even coders at all. If that happened, it sure as hell wasn't anyone with talent to fix the bug in the KB article.

      Uhm maybe the reason could be that Linux doesn't have shitload of money?
      If Linux could hire developers to do units tests and quality assurance for that money. I can guarantie that it would be almost 100% bug free.


      It doesn't need money because people give away their time on it for free. Anyone that wants to help can, vs. MS where you actually have to be an employee to contribute. Also, when did Linux become a company? Do you even really know what Linux is? I'm starting to wonder if you're some 12 year old kid spouting from his mom's basement.

      It isn't even about the money it is about priorities. Do you but priority on fixing bugs and making your product actually better than the competitor, or do you focus on useless and obtrusive things like DRM and fighting your competitors with underhand tactics?

      Ahh, back to the false dilemma. You can focus 100% on bugs because 1) there are probably always bugs, but they may only affect 0.00001% of cases and 2) you can't possibly know about all bugs just by looking at the code, they have to be discovered. Again, you sound like a 12 year old; at the very least you're not a professional software developer.

    76. Re:Runs on Windows? by kbg · · Score: 1

      Huh? How does the ribbon do anything to open source competitors? Believe it or not, I actually find it useful as well! But I guess that's just luck, because somehow their patent is keeping down the poor open source developers.
      Well Microsoft is in the progress of getting a patent on the ribbon (which is stupid because there is prior art) and you need a license from Microsoft to use the ribbon. Now the license is free which is good, however there are clauses in the contract that forbids it's use if you are developing software that competes in any way with Microsoft. This means that open source software like OpenOffice can't have any kind of UI which bears any resemblance to a ribbon.

      Wow, two fallacies in as many sentences. First, why can't they fix this issue AND add DRM? Do you think it would result in a fix faster for every developer to focus on ONE problem? I sure as hell don't. More isn't always better. Second, you assume that the people "bribing" ISO members are even coders at all. If that happened, it sure as hell wasn't anyone with talent to fix the bug in the KB article.
      Well because DRM is a waste of time for developers. It's impossible to protect content that you want still to be available for viewing by the same user that you are protecting it from, therefore the wasted time would have been better spent on other things. Yes the "bribing" was probably done by the marketing department, which unfortunately Microsoft seems to put more emphasis on than on actual development.

      It doesn't need money because people give away their time on it for free. Anyone that wants to help can, vs. MS where you actually have to be an employee to contribute. Also, when did Linux become a company? Do you even really know what Linux is? I'm starting to wonder if you're some 12 year old kid spouting from his mom's basement.
      I am talking about Linux in the general sense, I know it is not "a company". I am only mentioning what could be done, if you could hire professional outside developers to work on it full time. I'm am starting to wonder if you are a Microsoft employee or know someone who is.

      Ahh, back to the false dilemma. You can focus 100% on bugs because 1) there are probably always bugs, but they may only affect 0.00001% of cases and 2) you can't possibly know about all bugs just by looking at the code, they have to be discovered. Again, you sound like a 12 year old; at the very least you're not a professional software developer.
      Well actually I am a professional software developer and have been in the business for the last 15 years, so I am far from being a 12 year old :)
      You can have almost bug free code, NASA can do it, of course it means you have to have a very tight software development and must spent a lot of time and money on testing and not waste time with useless stuff.
      You have to realise this is not some third party application we are talking about, this is the core OS which is used by millions of people every day, crashes and corruption bugs should be priority number one.

      OK I think this thread here is getting a little out of control :)
      I think we can agree on that at least the fix is available and it is in testing which is good :)
    77. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Well Microsoft is in the progress of getting a patent on the ribbon (which is stupid because there is prior art) and you need a license from Microsoft to use the ribbon. Now the license is free which is good, however there are clauses in the contract that forbids it's use if you are developing software that competes in any way with Microsoft. This means that open source software like OpenOffice can't have any kind of UI which bears any resemblance to a ribbon.

      Oh well. That's what patents are supposed to do. But you're trying to claim it will be imposible for OOo to compete if it CAN'T copy the ribbon? Funny, because most here say the ribbon is crap. I guess you're saying its not though, but that the open source people can't innovate anything, only copy that which was done before.

      Well because DRM is a waste of time for developers. It's impossible to protect content that you want still to be available for viewing by the same user that you are protecting it from, therefore the wasted time would have been better spent on other things. Yes the "bribing" was probably done by the marketing department, which unfortunately Microsoft seems to put more emphasis on than on actual development.

      Who are you to decide what is a waste of time for developers? MS needs to implement it because hollywood wants it. Simple as that. Now, do you have any proof anyone was bribed?

      I am talking about Linux in the general sense, I know it is not "a company". I am only mentioning what could be done, if you could hire professional outside developers to work on it full time. I'm am starting to wonder if you are a Microsoft employee or know someone who is.

      Perhaps then you shouldn't talk as if it were a company. You might also be interested to know that IBM and many other companies actually do put money into Linux as well. But they also get lots of free help. So you think I'm an MS employee because I've been able to dismantle your argument completely? Hardly. I use their stuff and earn a living developing software with MS technology. That's about the extent of my relationship with them.

      Well actually I am a professional software developer and have been in the business for the last 15 years, so I am far from being a 12 year old :) You can have almost bug free code, NASA can do it, of course it means you have to have a very tight software development and must spent a lot of time and money on testing and not waste time with useless stuff.

      NASA can do it because for one they have to, lives depend on it. They also can do it because they have a larger budget and no real deadlines. Again, you switch when I call you out on something; you go from wanting 100% bug free code to "almost bug free," whatever that means.

      You have to realise this is not some third party application we are talking about, this is the core OS which is used by millions of people every day, crashes and corruption bugs should be priority number one.

      Yes, I do realize that. I also realize that in a company filled with Windows boxes, I've seen zero random file corruptions due to the OS. If files were corrupting as often as you have been attempting to claim, MS certainly would be out of business.

      OK I think this thread here is getting a little out of control :)
      I think we can agree on that at least the fix is available and it is in testing which is good :)


      That's been my arguement all along. I would hope at this point you agree that "Windows randomly corrupts files" is quite a bit different and misleading than this statement you just made.

    78. Re:Runs on Windows? by kbg · · Score: 1

      Oh well. That's what patents are supposed to do. But you're trying to claim it will be imposible for OOo to compete if it CAN'T copy the ribbon? Funny, because most here say the ribbon is crap. I guess you're saying its not though, but that the open source people can't innovate anything, only copy that which was done before.

      I personally find the ribbon to be crap but that's just me. However I would think one of the reason for OO is to provide an open source alternative for Microsoft monopoly on word processing. Given that it could be necessary to have an option in OO to have an alternate ribbon UI for those wanting to migrate from Office to OO. This option has now been permanently banned by Microsoft because they want to be a monoploy.

      The ribbon isn't innovation it has been done many times before in other applications. Having software and UI patentable is just insane, computer methods can always be mapped into doing something using just pen and paper, adding a computer into it doesn't make it innovative. Software is also just a mathematical construct and you don't patent math. Just imagine how far we would be behind times if math was patentable.

      Who are you to decide what is a waste of time for developers? MS needs to implement it because hollywood wants it. Simple as that. Now, do you have any proof anyone was bribed?

      Yes exactly because Hollywood needs it, what about the wishes of the users that buy the system? If the chinese government wanted Microsoft to implement filters at the OS level to censor information then you would just be okay with that? Unfortunately the bribing can't be proven, but that doesn't you mean you can't draw your own conclusions from the episode. Just the same way as O.J was not guilty everyone knows what actually happened.

      What is really ironic about Hollywood today with all their DRM and DVD price fixing is that it all started with them breaking the law and refusing to pay patent royalties to Edison.

      Perhaps then you shouldn't talk as if it were a company. You might also be interested to know that IBM and many other companies actually do put money into Linux as well. But they also get lots of free help. So you think I'm an MS employee because I've been able to dismantle your argument completely? Hardly. I use their stuff and earn a living developing software with MS technology. That's about the extent of my relationship with them.

      So just because you use MS technology you are just okay with them taking away all your rights? What about the freedom to use YOUR computer the way you want to? Remember they can cripple your computer anytime they like either because they want to or because of simple bugs. It saddens me that you don't seem to have critical thinking just because you get paid.

      Being a big company or a government doesn't mean you are always right. Was McCarthyism just okay because it was the government doing it? What about slavery? You may say "well that was a long time ago" yes but that doesn't mean everything right now is just okay. In a 100 years people will say the same things about some of the stuff now. For example terrorism is at the same level now as communism was once. If you want to mess up someones life and credibility you just label them terrorists like you once labeled them communists and the government will react accordingly.

      NASA can do it because for one they have to, lives depend on it. They also can do it because they have a larger budget and no real deadlines. Again, you switch when I call you out on something; you go from wanting 100% bug free code to "almost bug free," whatever that means.

      Windows is unfortunately used in many hospitals for critical stuff so a corruption bug could b

    79. Re:Runs on Windows? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      I personally find the ribbon to be crap but that's just me. However I would think one of the reason for OO is to provide an open source alternative for Microsoft monopoly on word processing. Given that it could be necessary to have an option in OO to have an alternate ribbon UI for those wanting to migrate from Office to OO. This option has now been permanently banned by Microsoft because they want to be a monoploy.

      Why would having a ribbon or not make an impact in migration? We're not talking about file formats here (which IMO is more important than whether the UI is similar when talking about migration). It's a different UI, one that you have to relearn anyway when moving to OOo.

      The ribbon isn't innovation it has been done many times before in other applications. Having software and UI patentable is just insane, computer methods can always be mapped into doing something using just pen and paper, adding a computer into it doesn't make it innovative. Software is also just a mathematical construct and you don't patent math. Just imagine how far we would be behind times if math was patentable.

      Really? What applications? Not any I've seen. Whether or not patents should be valid is a whole other argument. While patents CAN be gotten for software, I can't fault MS for getting patents. IBM and Sun also patent quite a bit as well. I don't think any of those companies really want software to be patentable though. MS is paying quite a bit in royalties, as are the other companies.

      Yes exactly because Hollywood needs it, what about the wishes of the users that buy the system? If the chinese government wanted Microsoft to implement filters at the OS level to censor information then you would just be okay with that? Unfortunately the bribing can't be proven, but that doesn't you mean you can't draw your own conclusions from the episode. Just the same way as O.J was not guilty everyone knows what actually happened.

      What is really ironic about Hollywood today with all their DRM and DVD price fixing is that it all started with them breaking the law and refusing to pay patent royalties to Edison.


      Well if MS doesn't implement it, you probably won't be able to legally watch movies on your PC at all. So if the choice is play movies, but be restricted, or NOT be able to play movies at all on your PC, I think most users would opt to have the option, even if restricted.

      The hippocracy of the MPAA is not relevent to this discussion; MS' users want to watch movies, and the only way MS can provide that is to play ball. I believe they've also come out against DRM as well... but until they win that battle, they want to provide an OS that at least allows restricted viewing.

      So just because you use MS technology you are just okay with them taking away all your rights? What about the freedom to use YOUR computer the way you want to? Remember they can cripple your computer anytime they like either because they want to or because of simple bugs. It saddens me that you don't seem to have critical thinking just because you get paid.

      I'm sorry, you're way off base. I haven't lost all my rights. I can use the computer the way I want. I actually felt more restricted when running Linux; jumping through hoops just for simple maintence or updating, not being able to buy hardware without checking lists. And Linux had plenty of bugs too. I've had more crashes in the years I was running Linux on my desktop than I have on Windows since I switched back.

      Being a big company or a government doesn't mean you are always right. Was McCarthyism just okay because it was the government doing it? What about slavery? You may say "well that was a long time ago" yes but that doesn't mean everything right now is just okay. In a 100 years people will say the same things about some of the stuff now. For example terrorism is at the same level now as communism was once. If you want to mess up someones life and credibility you just label them terrorists like you onc

  2. Re:Real Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    MiniCity link. Avoid as usual.

  3. Buggy software exhibits bugs when run on Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this some sort of newsflash? Why is Windows relevant to this story at all?

  4. terrible timing by Sadsfae · · Score: 0

    A friend of mine who was present at the event said people were booing/hissing hysterically. This was all over the local news in Seattle I am surprised it too so long to make /.

    --
    Have a squat over at the hobo house.
    1. Re:terrible timing by Quarters · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a whole 7 hrs and 33 minutes after the event. Well, more like 7 hrs and 27 minutes since there was a six minute pause during the show. Wow, Slashdot posters/moderators are the worst for having to, you know, sleep!

    2. Re:terrible timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, only 4 hours and 33 or 27 minutes. The story post time is EST, but Seattle is on PST, so the incident happened at 3:00AM EST.

    3. Re:terrible timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We were all out getting laid. I guess you didn't get the memo.

  5. Doesn't run on Windows® by lililalancia · · Score: 4, Funny

    Shouldn't that be "the show doesn't 'run' on Windows" ?

  6. It's obvious what happened by Sadsfae · · Score: 5, Funny

    Someone wasn't there click "Allow" when the dialog popped up asking "Are you sure you want to proceed with the fireworks extravaganza?"

    --
    Have a squat over at the hobo house.
    1. Re:It's obvious what happened by ThePromenader · · Score: 5, Funny

      I bet it was that &%^$&%^ talking paper clip that screwed things up. Or perhaps the "search dog" chose an untimely moment to go for a piss...

      --

      No, no sig. Really.

      ThePromenader
    2. Re:It's obvious what happened by kie · · Score: 5, Funny

      it looks like you're trying to light a firework,
      do you want help with that?

      --
      living the dream
    3. Re:It's obvious what happened by coldmist · · Score: 1

      No no no.

      It's windows. You either click 'Yes' or 'No'. However, you have to read the dialogue to know what you are saying 'yes' or 'no' to.

      So, in this case, it should have been 'Click yes if you want to not continue on, losing all fireworks settings, or no if you want to continue on without any issues.'

      I hate those!

      BTW, The Mac style guidelines (IIRC) say that clickable options on any dialogue have action associated to them. So, in Windows, it asks "By removing this file, other software might stop working. Remove anyway? Yes / No" But, on a Mac, it offers the options keep/remove. It's a subtle difference, but it's so much easier to work with.

      --
      Don't steal. The government hates competition.
    4. Re:It's obvious what happened by Aqua_boy17 · · Score: 1

      Well, at least they didn't get a BSOD (Blue Sky Of Death).

      --
      What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
    5. Re:It's obvious what happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, Clippy. Just hold this candle for a moment...

  7. Obviously... by WiglyWorm · · Score: 5, Funny

    Those fireworks were not vista Certified.

    1. Re:Obviously... by G33KDOTINFO · · Score: 1

      Lmao that was the funniest thing I read on this topic. I don't think that I was vista certified too, going back to xp as soon as I get back from my trip. I want to do it now, but backing up all files and reformatting is going to take too much time today.

  8. Re:Real Story by jacquesm · · Score: 5, Funny

    fuck those assholes.

    Dear Taco,

    I realize retirement is good but could you please come out of hiding, fix the code that shows the url a link points to in case it redirects...

    And if not then please release the IPS of these clowns, I promise I won't leave any traces.

    Happy new year

  9. Sounds Vaguely Familiar by sk999 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    From the article: "The source of the problem is reported to be a corrupted file ..."

    Gee, who can guess which version of Windows they were running?

    Microsoft's Windows Home Server corrupts files?

    1. Re:Sounds Vaguely Familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      From the article: "The source of the problem is reported to be a corrupted file ..."


      Gee, who can guess which version of Windows they were running?


      Umm, all of them?

  10. Last MS caused disaster... by Hymer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is this 2007th's last Microsoft caused disaster...
    ...or 2008th first ?
    The best part is that it happened in Microsofts backyard.
    --
    Just trying to get my first "Funny" tag in 2008 ;-)

    1. Re:Last MS caused disaster... by Locutus · · Score: 1

      what would be even funnier is if Bill and his whole family where in The Needle for the event. THAT would put the icing on the cake in really ring in 2008 the right way. As it is, I already like how 2008 is starting off.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  11. Credibility does matter by mangu · · Score: 1
    if this blogger said it ran on Linux, /. would have demanded more proof


    Of course, because everybody knows Linux has always been much more reliable than anything that comes from Microsoft.

    1. Re:Credibility does matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Of course, because everybody knows Linux has always been much more reliable than anything that comes from Microsoft."

      If you going to try to be stupid just to get some mod points, then why bother replying? /. is a bastion of Windows bashing. They will also run defense for anything they see as reflecting negatively on Linux.

      If this blogger had told them that the show was run with an open-source app, running on Ubuntu they, would not have even mentioned it. This story would not have been posted. And no that has nothing to do with some BS about "everybody knows Linux has always been much more reliable than anything that comes from Microsoft.".

  12. Negligence. by jcr · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Any company that puts the detonation of hundreds of pounds of explosives under the control of a windows machine is begging for a massive lawsuit.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Negligence. by jimmydevice · · Score: 1

      At select airports in the USA, Windows helps land your plane. It's just a second, independent solution for verification. We weren't stupid.

    2. Re:Negligence. by jimmydevice · · Score: 1

      No guarantee on the people they replaced us with though.

    3. Re:Negligence. by enoz · · Score: 1

      Any company that puts the detonation of hundreds of pounds of explosives under the control of a windows machine is begging for a massive lawsuit. Queue Windows for Warships jokes.
  13. Re:Buggy software exhibits bugs when run on Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not. That snide comment was most likely made up, but that wont stop a site like this from running it anyway because they need to start the new year like they spent most of the last, bashing Microsoft.

    I could have lied to these guys that it was running Vista on SP1, and I can guarantee that it would have been said by them.

  14. Re:Buggy software exhibits bugs when run on Window by mangu · · Score: 1

    Why is Windows relevant to this story at all?

    Because of their past history. It's a common legal practice to take into account former violations when accusing someone.
  15. Re:Real Story by eat+here_get+gas · · Score: 1

    dunno why you got modded "troll", i thought it was funny.
    the mods are smoking shitty crack i guess...

    --
    the significance of a signature is insignificant
  16. You need more data before you jump to conclusions by director_mr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unless you know what the file was stored on, what interactions with the computer caused the halting of the program and on what basis they decided to continue manually, you are jumping to conclusions. One guy even claimed there was BSOD mentioned in the article (nowhere was it mentioned I can see). After years of supporting computers and servers, I can confidently tell you there is no way of knowing what caused the glitches from the article. A corrupted file on which several pieces of hardware are going to coordinate something as complicated as a fireworks display is probably not caused by the operating system, as the operating system has no reason to modify the file at all, and will only be reading it. More likely is a malfunctioning hard drive, possibly bad media that was used to transfer the file from one location to another, Or possibly a bad connection between the file storing device and the computer running the program. If you look up corrupted file you will see that every operating system known to man has to deal with that. There is no operating system that can magically correct the corrupted file and cause a fireworks display to run correctly. That is just silly talk.

  17. Where does it say "BSOD"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It says "BSOD" in several places in the article"

    The PI article makes no mention of this.

  18. Buellar, Buellar by WED+Fan · · Score: 1

    one blog commenter, claiming to have worked on prior shows, said that the shows run on Windows."

    My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    1. Re:Buellar, Buellar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A friend of mine here in L.A. has a Ca.Pyrotechnician card/license and invited me to tag along on a show he was shooting for PyroSpectaculars. I ended up on his crew for 20-25 shows. In the mid '90's their office (in Rialto, Ca.) ran on a Token Ring of misc. Macs, but their show designers were on PC's, as were the laptops & fire-control software used in the field. I haven't been to their office in years, but I was told their aging (Pre-PPC) Mac's were phased out.

      Shooting a show from a barge (while you're on it!) off the coast of S. Ca. is a trip. The work's hard, long and very dirty-plus unless you're the guy with the license, the $$$ suck. (Think $50-$75 for a 10-18 hr day.) You do it for the fun/experience/stories and free t-shirts.

      Saw more unprofessional behavior than I would've guessed (Not when the owners were around!) with the smell of hemp often mixing with the acrid smell of the various chemicals in the shells, set-pieces etc.

      The Sousa family and PyroSpectaculars were pretty professional though, except for using their street address as the combo to their gate's padlock! Wonder if they've changed that!

  19. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by crosstax · · Score: 1

    I have a 70 Gb software RAID in my basement on a headless Pentium 133 or 166 powered by Slackware 11.0 serving over Samba. If a hard drive goes, I replace it and no harm is done.

    And I digress, there are algorithms to correct corrupted data streams though there are limits to the level of corruption they can correct.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_error_correction

    If the corrupted data file was the firing sequence data then I would have to say that this type of programming is best left to proper software engineers considering the danger to human lives. And if a software engineer didn't at least run a CRC check on the input file, I would suggest job displacement or at the very least some serious retraining.

    Engineering isn't for fly-by-wire hackers. Innovation is great and all but there are certain times when a profession's tried and true practices should be strictly adhered to.

    An unemployed man

  20. How about the reputation of the fireworks people? by gnutoo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Pyro Spectaculars. They have been in business for 30 years, have done multiple Olympic game shows and do other high profile shows every year. You can compare that to M$'s reputation for screwing everything up.

  21. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 1

    After years of supporting computers and servers, I can confidently tell you there is no way of knowing what caused the glitches from the article. If you said, "after years dealing with kernel code" I would buy your argument.

    --
    Your ad could be here!
  22. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We waited such a long time for that real Y2K bug!

    1. Re:Finally! by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      the ghost of Jebus was obviously pissed off that we celebrated the wrong year as his 2000th birthday, and so decided to haunt our computers on the wrong year as revenge. Expect him to be haunting computers all through the year as an expression of his anger.

  23. Re:Real Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Due to the nature of the web, this is a hard problem. The web is not a broadcast medium. It is a mass-unicast-medium: What redirects your browser need not redirect another browser. Sure, you could find the actual URL in case a standard redirection service was used, but the spammers will just use cheap/free DNS- and hosting-services to create their own redirection which hides from automated testing. You'd need a dynamically distributed system to detect such evasive behavior (inverse honeypots, so to speak.) The moderation system takes care of abusive links, so don't fret.

  24. Mod parent up. by Shandalar · · Score: 1

    It's childish gratuitous stupid bashing. Mod parent up. I'm tired of it.

  25. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by Obsidian+Butterfly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everything you just said would've cost more money. I'm pretty sure that wasn't a priority.

  26. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    Everything you just said would've cost more money. I'm pretty sure that wasn't a priority.
    I'm pretty sure getting contracts next year is a priority never mind actually doing what they were employed to do. This is a big priority for that reason.
    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  27. Re:Real Story by nilbud · · Score: 0

    Fuck those guys.

    --
    never let a man put his dirty how-do-you-do into your bajingo
  28. The Blue Screen of... OOOhhh! AHhhhh!! by jpellino · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sorry. Couldn't resist.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  29. Lessons in reliability? by jhines · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A single, or more than one, file gets corrupted and the show doesn't go on.

    Yes the underlying reasons for this happening are of interest to us, since many of us are charged with implementing or running systems, while not as showy, have to run to pay the bills.

    Yes, the operating system in use is an issue, since it has part of the job of keeping files from being corrupted. It has the job of catching errors.

    It was a flashy semi-failure in our collective business, we would be the stupid ones not to learn all we can about it.

    1. Re:Lessons in reliability? by rcw-home · · Score: 1

      A single, or more than one, file gets corrupted and the show doesn't go on.

      There's a saying: Of what you see on TV, believe 25%. 5% if the reporter is wearing a windbreaker.

      The article was posted on the P.I.'s website at 1:55am, less than two hours after the problem occurred. That puts this fine piece of journalism in the esteemed company of football post-game loser interviews.

      As a sysadmin, I hear accusations of "corrupted files" regularly. Very rarely is the problem actually a corrupted file. Shockingly rarely does anyone have any idea what file actually got corrupted. The most likely cause of this accusation (that I've seen) is DLL hell. It's common for someone to upgrade or downgrade a shared DLL when they install another application. This different version has a different set of bugs than the first version, and the original application wasn't ever tested with the different version. Strange problems crop up and reinstalling the original application miraculously fixes it. The DLL wasn't ever corrupt.

      Let us know what they say when they've had a good night's sleep and have done a proper post-mortem.

  30. Re:Real Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt these minicity cunts are that intelligent/committed.

  31. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure that wasn't a priority.

    I'm pretty sure it is now.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  32. Hello 2008...just like 2007 by davmoo · · Score: 1

    And yes ... one blog commenter, claiming to have worked on prior shows, said that the shows run on Windows

    And yes ... this has not one goddamned thing to do with the reported problem.

    I see Slashdot is going to resort to low brow sensationalism just as much in 2008 as they did in 2007.

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
  33. New Years Resolution by Plutonite · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ballmer can help you launch chairs, not fireworks. Use FOSS for a happy new year.

  34. Re:Real Story by RobertLTux · · Score: 2, Insightful

    in support of your campaign i have put *.myminicity.com\* into my adblock filterset

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  35. Re:How about the reputation of the fireworks peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And during those 30 years, they've been using Windows without problems. Your point?

  36. Re:Real Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Might work better if you used / instead of \ ?

  37. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    There are many ways to keep the risk of corruption low. Hell, if you know the CRC of the original, valid table and have a live backup of the file available in case the primary is damaged, you can avoid problems like this. A better approach is to CRC individual records in the file: if one is found to be corrupt as the firing sequence is proceeding, restore it from a backup file and continue. If that doesn't work, skip the corrupt record and continue with show.

    Running a fireworks show is not a high availability application (I mean, it only has to run once for a few minutes) but it is a mission-critical app in that it damn well has to run successfully. In such an environment, you run a hot backup system with a watchdog timer and some kind of automatic switchover of the control outputs. The backup system constantly monitors the run state of the primary, so if the primary controller faults out the backup will take over seamlessly. For something as costly as a fireworks show, this would be a reasonable approach, and in fact is commonly used in industry.

    Let's face it: when it comes to computers shit happens ... sometimes it's the hardware, sometimes the software, and in an environment such as this you have to account for both.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  38. Windows in control of fireworks???? by Doug52392 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Who in their ripe minds would put Windows in control of launching fireworks at a big event??? A Linux system would work much better :) Using a Windows machine was just asking for a "Hundreds hurt in fireworks accident, Windows to blame" headline in all major US newspapers.

    1. Re:Windows in control of fireworks???? by Faylone · · Score: 1

      Great, so it'd be "Hundreds hurt in fireworks accident, Linux to blame" and be just as accurate?

    2. Re:Windows in control of fireworks???? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``Who in their ripe minds would put Windows in control of launching fireworks at a big event???''

      If I were to venture a guess, I would say "people who have been doing exactly that, successfully, for a number of years."

      ``A Linux system would work much better''

      Yes, but would it actually run the show? You need applications for that, you know.

      ``Using a Windows machine was just asking for a "Hundreds hurt in fireworks accident, Windows to blame" headline in all major US newspapers.''

      Unlikely. Windows has been to blame for a number of large problems in IT, but I don't see any headlines about that, least of all in major US newspapers. In this case, my guess is the problem isn't even with Windows.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    3. Re:Windows in control of fireworks???? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      If I were to venture a guess, I would say "people who have been doing exactly that, successfully, for a number of years."

      So what? When it comes to the design and implementation of process control systems, the simple fact that something can be made to work has no bearing on whether it will continue to work! What matters is that the fundamental design is sound, and that the implementation was tested. Even then, things go wrong ... but no matter how you look at it you're playing the odds. The difference is that, statistically, well-designed and tested systems fail less often.

      Unlikely. Windows has been to blame for a number of large problems in IT, but I don't see any headlines about that, least of all in major US newspapers. In this case, my guess is the problem isn't even with Windows.

      Very likely, because the reason that you don't hear much about major IT disasters (Windows or otherwise) is that the corporations (and government agencies) involved bury the information to avoid embarrassment or accountability. In the case of a fireworks show, it's hard to hide the fact that something went wrong.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  39. Re:Buggy software exhibits bugs when run on Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Three strikes applies to sentencing. Accusations are usually made on the basis of evidence as to a party's guilt in the case at hand, or by idiots with an ax to grind.

    And since there doesn't appear to be any of the former...

  40. Re:Buggy software exhibits bugs when run on Window by argiedot · · Score: 1

    Because it's in good fun, just like when Microsoft showed that video with a spoof of the Matrix where the Agents have trouble with Neo/Ballmer because their copy of Linux needed the "kernel to be recompiled with a new device driver", or when all of us made fun of the Linux-sponsored car "crashing" in its first race. Ha ha Linux crashing, get it? It's not some evil propaganda trying to convince you that Windows is bad.

    I hate explaining jokes but looking at the Wikipedia entry for Redmond and the looking at which city had this trouble, it's not hard to smile at that.

  41. Re:Buggy software exhibits bugs when run on Window by caluml · · Score: 1

    That's not the case in every country though - I don't believe that to be the case in the UK. A case is judged on the evidence presented at the time, relevant to the specific alleged offence.

  42. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by aethera · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From what little we have to go on in the article, it looks like there was a problem with syncing to time code. It's been a few years since I last did time as a tech at a major theme park, but our fireworks shows looked a little like this: There was a dedicated computer running the pyro controls, one running sound playback, one controlling the lasers, one controlling lights and fog, and one controlling some miscellany such as a 70mm film projector and the large water pumps that produced a screen the movie was rear-projected onto. All of these computers could be a little buggy given that this was in the days of windows 98 and getting device drivers to play nice was always a problem. But this stuff was worked out long before showtime. The biggest problem that could show up at the last minute would be the SMPTE time code that keeps it all synced up. One intermittent cabling problem somewhere in the system could cause a computer to get bad or no time code signal at all, causing at least that one element to not playback correctly. The best way to solve this problem was to notice it ASAP, usually in the few seconds of preroll before the show starts so that you can manually sync everything at a predetermined point. But there really is no ability to pause just one element or speed up others. Once you're off time code, you're going to have to go manual, and at least with pyro with all of the different fuse delays involved, manual just isn't going to be quite right. The only other last minute problem I could think of would be a corrupted file, or more than likely a revision that wasn't saved correctly or an outdated file being loaded automatically by the show control software and no one verifying that it was the proper version. These holiday shows are a one off, of course, so there is no dress rehearsel. You can run all the simulations you want, but you only get to fire off the pyro once.

  43. Microsoft Home Server? by CJSYVR · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Were they running MS Home Server? That has had some file corruption issues as of late. ;)

  44. No Substantiated Cause by sciop101 · · Score: 1
    Computer Glitch:ACCEPTED

    OS: UNKNOWN

    Slashdotters are 12 years old pretending to be thirteen.

    --
    The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
    1. Re:No Substantiated Cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you, like 10?

  45. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by Fweeky · · Score: 1

    If you look up corrupted file you will see that every operating system known to man has to deal with that. There is no operating system that can magically correct the corrupted file and cause a fireworks display to run correctly. That is just silly talk. ZFS checksums everything, and mailing lists and blogs are full of people mentioning that it's detected and corrected corruption on their HD's. Sometimes it's corruption that's been happening unnoticed for years on other filesystems, aside from the odd mysterious crash, now reduced to a number in the CKSUM column of zpool status (provided there's a good alternative copy, which doesn't have to be on a different disk).
  46. Re:Real Story by phoenixwade · · Score: 2, Informative

    dunno why you got modded "troll", i thought it was funny.

    the mods are smoking shitty crack i guess... Because the losers who have minishitty sites get mod points every now and then too.... It balances out after a while, though......

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
  47. Why Windows? by kilodelta · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've seen so many instances of BSOD's on things like gas pumps, ATM's, etc. Windows sucks. Am I using it, yes I am. I'm well familiar with its eccentricities. Would I use it for mission critical projects, hell no.

    1. Re:Why Windows? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Would I use it for mission critical projects, hell no.
      Synchronizing fireworks displays is not "mission critical". But as the story says, it was a corrupted data file, not the OS.
      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:Why Windows? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Depends upon your definition: in mind this application does qualify as mission critical. In this case, it means you only get one shot and everything is riding on it.

      So don't dismiss this is just a fireworks show. Sure, the Space Shuttle isn't going to come tumbling down if the system fails ... but millions of dollars will be lost. These shows are expensive. I'm just surprised they didn't invest in a more robust controller, that's all. People that design these systems need to learn one simple lesson: the computer is not your friend, and neither is the compiler. Take steps to make sure unforeseen occurrences don't shut you down.

      Windows is not a predictable OS. Yes, NT-derived versions are a whole lot better than Windows 98, but nevertheless they have their problems in situations where you can't tolerate a malfunction. The best approach, in my opinion, would be a reliable embedded system to run the show, with perhaps a Windows or Mac system as the front end. That way you can have you GUI, but something a tad more solid than a desktop OS will be in charge of actually lighting off your fireworks. And use more than one with a watchdog and automatic failover in case something does break.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Why Windows? by DrJokepu · · Score: 1

      Windows is not a predictable OS. Yes, NT-derived versions are a whole lot better than Windows 98, but nevertheless they have their problems in situations where you can't tolerate a malfunction.
      I'm glad that my Debian box is not going to crash due to a hard disk failure at the wrong place and wrong time. Wait, what's that clicking nois^H
    4. Re:Why Windows? by Blkdeath · · Score: 1

      Synchronizing fireworks displays is not "mission critical". But as the story says, it was a corrupted data file, not the OS.

      Since the synchronized fireworks display was the mission, and the actual firing of said fireworks was critical, yes, the system in question was mission critical.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    5. Re:Why Windows? by RoboRay · · Score: 1

      It absolutely is mission critical, to the people responsible for the display.

    6. Re:Why Windows? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Hence my point that in such an application, you need something more fault-tolerant than a single computer.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  48. At least they didn't use the Window's "time" stuff by Craptastic+Weasel · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, it could have been worse, imagine if they used the algorithm from the program that determines how long a file will take to to transfer...

    10... 9... 80.. 6430... 6... -3..

    happy new years :)

  49. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by director_mr · · Score: 1

    After years of dealing with people who deal with kernel code, I know how to spot a hardware problem when I see one. This kind of problem has a very high probability of being a hardware issue, mixed with an end user screw up. Probably because they didn't take all the precautions they should have, or possibly because it was unrealistic and too expensive to take all the precautions they would have liked to. If you think this was a kernel problem, you need to take a breath and realize other things besides kernel cause problems.

    When you have a hammer, you start treating everything like it is a nail. Programmers treat everything like it is a programming issue. You don't know how many times I've replaced hardware on a server and repaired it after some hapless coder was trying to code around a hardware issue.

  50. corrupt file - windows? by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    My server had a corrupt file last month. I replaced an old harddisk and now everythijn is ok again, but....

    Yes, in my blog you can read I run Windows Etch.

    I mean I THOUGHT I had installed Debian, but as I read the article it seems corrupt files are a Windows thing so I must be running Windows Etch....

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  51. Fireworks in windows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Silly Seattle. You don't shoot fireworks through windows. Double-glazed glass isn't cheap.

  52. fireworks by Hugundous · · Score: 1

    What's that on the horizon? Microsoft Fireworks 2008. oh yes.

  53. Video by jxself · · Score: 2, Informative

    A video of the event in H.264 video and AAC audio of if you're interested: http://aws.bluehome.net/2008.mp4 (Listen for the booing in the background.)

    1. Re:Video by psydad · · Score: 1

      My daughter was there - said she laughed so hard she almost peed :)

    2. Re:Video by psydad · · Score: 1

      Oh - sorry - forgot this was /. - she uses Ubuntu...

  54. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get why windows folks are fine with files just getting "corrupted" on a daily basis. They don't swap out the hard disks though right? They just re-install, and somehow that makes sense to them. To Unix/Linux folk a corrupted file is serious, you don't just reinstall your kernel because a driver must have been corrupted for example... The Unix/Linux admin will freak out and try and make sure it doesn't happen again.

  55. Re:relevant enough to plagiarize by mrv20 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I see nothing hypocritical or crazy about wishing to hold your own government to basic ethical standards. If anything it shows a love of your country to care that the constitutional right to a fair trial is upheld.

    The hypocrisy lies in building prisons and interrogation centres in foreign countries to avoid those pesky American laws that would otherwise prevent the activities that go on in them. You seem to be under the mistaken apprehension that allowing the indefinite detainment and torture of suspects for information (suspects, not even convicted of any crime) makes the country a safer place. Maybe right now you don't fit the right profiles to be whisked off to Guantanamo but that can change much more easily than you'd like to believe. It makes no difference whether the country falls to its enemies or voluntarily gives up its rights; the end result is still the same - tyranny and lack of freedom.

    Doubtless there are many brave and honorable people working in the armed forces and intelligence agencies to safeguard our existence and they deserve our gratitude but it is an impossible task to keep the country 100% safe from threats without depriving people of their liberty (and even then it is unlikely to be fully effective). To remain free we must accept a certain amount of risk - I would gladly choose a small increase in the probability of dying in a terrorist attack in return for knowing that my own government cannot hold people without trial or torture them. It strikes me that to do otherwise is the cowardly option.

    Pointing out that there are worse violators of human rights in the world is irrelevent - it does not make American abuses any less egregious in the same way that the existence of serial killers does not justify committing murder.

    --
    "Algebraical symbols are used when you don't know what you are talking about" - BCS
  56. Re:At least they didn't use the Window's "time" st by Silver+Gryphon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's been fixed in Vista. Now it just starts out with an hour and counts down as it finds success. Like Scotty on the Enterprise - tell 'em it'll take an hour, so when it finishes sooner they're impressed.

  57. Re:Real Story by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 1

    I put these into my /etc/hosts... 127.0.0.1 snipurl.com
    127.0.0.1 xrl.us
    127.0.0.1 myminicity.com
    127.0.0.1 tubeurl.com
    127.0.0.1 tinyurl.com
    127.0.0.1 tinyurl.co.uk

  58. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    ``A corrupted file on which several pieces of hardware are going to coordinate something as complicated as a fireworks display is probably not caused by the operating system, as the operating system has no reason to modify the file at all, and will only be reading it.''

    Yes, that's what you would expect. But if this really were a Windows glitch, it wouldn't be the first time. I remember something about a Windows file server system silently corrupting files...that was on Slashdot a few days back, IIRC.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  59. Culture by Crag · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your point is valid: the failure was probably not directly attributable to the operating system. It may be that the automation was developed in Java/Eclipse and would have broken identically on any platform.

    However, the point of many Microsoft 'haters' on /. has been that Microsoft tools are explicitly designed to interfere with the freedom of its users and especially developers. This is not an especially contentions point in the debate because the Microsoft side of the argument is that this is their value-add. Deployments of Microsoft products are argued to be more consistent because the tools prohibit 'hacking'. Microsoft proponents also claim that there is less need for freedom in Microsoft tools because they tools integrate with each other seamlessly and 'just work'.

    The reason some folks make these childish comments may be little more than "I told you so"-ism with a little confirmation bias, but the longer-winded version of these comments don't get any attention any more. The longer versions are basically re-hashes of essays by the likes of RMS, ESR, Bruce Perens, Linus Torvalds, Larry Wall and other FOSS folks.

    So, in short, tools which are designed to prevent their users from modifying them attract and breed users who have no interest or experience in knowing how their tools work, how they don't work, and how to integrate them with tools which were not developed by the same company. "It only runs on Windows" is an indication to some that a tool is fragile, so whenever something breaks those people will naturally assume that thing runs on Windows even if Windows was not the cause of the breakage.

    To answer your question, the point of mentioning that it runs on Windows is to re-iterate the above.

  60. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must be new here. Nobody cares about your rational comments. The sole purpose of Slashdot is to provide a forum for snarky Microsoft bashing. Find another forum where you actually fit in.

  61. karma whore much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The parent should be modded offtopic, since nowhere in the article are BSODs or anything like that mentioned, but you should be modded as flamebait. "Windoze"? "M$"? Seriously, it's 2008.

  62. Re:Buggy software exhibits bugs when run on Window by mangu · · Score: 1

    I don't believe that to be the case in the UK

    Yes, it is. The UK police tries, condemns, and executes on the spot people who look or behave in a suspicious way. This is absolutely normal, they have to start somewhere. Who are the usual suspects? In the case of computer programs misbehaving, Microsoft Windows gets the rap, if no other evidence is available. Or would you prefer the police to start investigating people at random when any crime is committed?
  63. Re:How about the reputation of the fireworks peopl by Locutus · · Score: 1

    where did you find information on these guys have a 100% success rate until now? Had this not been blogged, who outside of a few thousand WA residents would have known what happened?

    What blows me away is that with that kind of history, they didn't have a backup system so the show still went on and sync'ed to SOME music. Obviously, engineering is not something they thought was important when it comes to their computer control software and hardware.

    Makes you wonder what kind of things are getting put into other automation systems? Wasn't there a story recently of a Windows computer getting hacked in a cab and the passenger was able to get admin control of the Windows PC with all its web browser, file access, and system control software available/installed? There's the CSX railroad signaling system which was taken offline by a Windows virus... How about the new voting machines? There sure are alot of hacks getting jobs putting a poorly designed OS places it should not be and using poor judgment right through to the application design and installation configurations.

    please show the data stating they have not had any previous problems with their software/hardware.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  64. How to advocate free software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    twitter, please read this carefully. Following this advice will make Slashdot a better place for everyone, including yourself.

    • As a representative of the Linux community, participate in mailing list and newsgroup discussions in a professional manner. Refrain from name-calling and use of vulgar language. Consider yourself a member of a virtual corporation with Mr. Torvalds as your Chief Executive Officer. Your words will either enhance or degrade the image the reader has of the Linux community.
    • Avoid hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims at all costs. It's unprofessional and will result in unproductive discussions.
    • A thoughtful, well-reasoned response to a posting will not only provide insight for your readers, but will also increase their respect for your knowledge and abilities.
    • Always remember that if you insult or are disrespectful to someone, their negative experience may be shared with many others. If you do offend someone, please try to make amends.
    • Focus on what Linux has to offer. There is no need to bash the competition. Linux is a good, solid product that stands on its own.
    • Respect the use of other operating systems. While Linux is a wonderful platform, it does not meet everyone's needs.
    • Refer to another product by its proper name. There's nothing to be gained by attempting to ridicule a company or its products by using "creative spelling". If we expect respect for Linux, we must respect other products.
    • Give credit where credit is due. Linux is just the kernel. Without the efforts of people involved with the GNU project , MIT, Berkeley and others too numerous to mention, the Linux kernel would not be very useful to most people.
    • Don't insist that Linux is the only answer for a particular application. Just as the Linux community cherishes the freedom that Linux provides them, Linux only solutions would deprive others of their freedom.
    • There will be cases where Linux is not the answer. Be the first to recognize this and offer another solution.

    From http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/docs/HOWTO/Advocacy

  65. BSOD renamed to... by Col+Bat+Guano · · Score: 1

    Black Sky Of Death

    1. Re:BSOD renamed to... by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      More like Black Sky of Dimness.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  66. Dear Alberto by not_hylas(+) · · Score: 1

    Dear Alberto,

    It doesn't matter which OS you use as your controller, you ALWAYS have a fail-safe machine, or two.
    I bet you'll remember that in the future.
    ALWAYS.

    Yes, I WAS a show tech.

    --
    ~hylas
  67. Having seen the show live... it was hilarious by themushroom · · Score: 1

    Just a token post about the fireworks show itself and not about the operating system. There should be one, you know.

    Okay, what was hilarious was not so much how everything on the Needle just stopped without warning (funny as that was) but that once it finally restarted, they finished playing Liza Minelli's "Caberet" as the fireworks shot -- and then for the rest of the pyrotechnics it was without background music. Or that's how it played out on KING-5 TV, couldn't say about in person cuz some of us geeks don't get the night off and gotta work the night shift.

  68. was there by Amocat · · Score: 1

    I was there down on 4th and Denny... man you shoulda heard the boos and cursing.

    Man what a spoiled lot of babies....

  69. The Summary is a troll by FozE_Bear · · Score: 1

    Can you mod the Summary as troll?

  70. Good start to the year.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sign of things to come maybe??

    I bet they spent 15 trillion dollars trying to get it right. I mean even the Canadians went off on time, how hard could it be.

  71. This is why you do two wire sets to explosives by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    The failure demonstrates why explosives, including this type, should have two sets of wires to the ignitors with two controller panels.

    As to OS, when I worked on the Space Needle database, it was an Oracle DBMS on Linux boxen, which we did migrate to WinOS later. The main failure point is the constant lightning strikes that burn out the systems more frequently than other protected ones.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:This is why you do two wire sets to explosives by enosys · · Score: 1

      You have to protect against the computer not firing explosives and against it firing them when it shouldn't. I don't see how two wires can protect against both cases. Having two independent systems might even increase the chance of failure.

    2. Re:This is why you do two wire sets to explosives by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      No, that is what the physical disconnect on primer sets is for - only one is wired in, the other is not and is only fired if the first fails.

      But, hey, I have many years of practical experience with demolitions ... so what do I know about safety, huh?

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  72. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by bertok · · Score: 1

    That used to be true, at least for hardware-level corruption.

    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS

    Also, I'm betting they were using consumer-grade hardware, which is notorious for skipping the 5$ extra chip needed for ECC.

  73. Fireworks synchronised to music, suck. by lewko · · Score: 1

    It's a growing trend to synchronise major fireworks displays to music. The NYE fireworks in Sydney, Australia have had a 'soundtrack' for many years.

    It never seems to work for me. The reason, is that they synchronise the mid-air explosion to the music, not the kaboom that accompanys the launch of the shell.

    That is, every shell goes boom and a few seconds later when airborne, boom again. The second boom is usually a lot quieter. This is also before you add in the delay of the boom getting to you based on distance.

    We are used to "booms" matching the music (think 1812 Overture). The only way it really works, is watching from a long way away, in which case the fireworks suck anyway.

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
    1. Re:Fireworks synchronised to music, suck. by Baumi · · Score: 1

      It's a growing trend to synchronise major fireworks displays to music.
      [...]
      It never seems to work for me. The reason, is that they synchronise the mid-air explosion to the music, not the kaboom that accompanys the launch of the shell. Actually, I think they synchronise it to the visuals of the explosions, which works fine for me. The "kaboom" sounds are more of a necessary evil, IMHO. You still have to be close enough to the speakers, of course, otherwise the light will reach you before the music. At one major show I watched, they compensated for this by slightly delaying the soundtrack in the speakers farther away from the fireworks.
    2. Re:Fireworks synchronised to music, suck. by lewko · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think they synchronise it to the visuals of the explosions

      Yeah, that's what I meant.

      The "kaboom" sounds are more of a necessary evil

      Are you kidding? Without the Earth-shattering kaboom, it's just a screensaver.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  74. Sure, it's Windows, but... by professorfalcon · · Score: 1

    ...at least they have an OS driver for the fireworks.

  75. They at least started it out right... by 5of0 · · Score: 1

    Give the guys a break...they at least started it with the Star Wars theme. And the fireworks were almost in sync for the first few seconds! That gets them some credit...right?

    --
    You all have Oo.o and Firefox, so get World Wind.
  76. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    Having had past experience with smpte re video editing etc... why on earth do those machines need CONTINOUS timing, surely all they need is a start
    trigger and off they go using their own clocks. Its not like they need to individually slowdown/speed up because you just said that cannot be done, tho
    it should have been possible with multi smpte signals from a generator with individual speed controls/pause/restart modes.

    Even in more past earlier days on Amigas using 3 to do music+stuff, we only syncronized the trigger and bang it off went within 20ms of each other. Enough
    for any audio/video sync to be perfect.

    For the modern coders, please remember, do not trust the OS, it can go wrong, even windows doesnt keep two copies of the SYSTEM registry (idiots), so
    I remind you, when ever you write to config files/data files, keep the previous copy as a .old and do not overwrite the current one, but rename it to .tmp
    and write to a .new then rename to the .final when done, to avoid any sudden errors. More prudent hardcore coders will keep 10 historical copies just incase.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  77. Re:You need more data before you jump to conclusio by DarkDigger · · Score: 1

    Are you talking about Fantasmic at Disneyland? Thats what it sounds like to me at least.

  78. Linux Programs Crash Too!!! by johnsie · · Score: 0

    There's alot of really buggy programs for Linux too. That's why there is a "force-quit" option in the Gnome panel and a kill command in the terminal. I guess with any software it's the quality of the code in the software itself that makes it reliable. The reason why you are more likely to see windows crash isn't necessarily because it is less stable than, it's because it is much more widely used.

  79. Patience... by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

    Seattle's firework display is powered by the same computer that hosts the XBOX live service
    Give them time guys, they'll fix the problems one at a time.

    --
    "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
  80. Didnt notice.,.. by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

    I watched the fireworks on TV from a Seattle-area bar, and no one noticed anything was wrong. Of course, that was after 8 straight hours of drinking.