First, this has nothing to do with Microsoft, so there is no need to drag them into it.
Second, I am not questioning the need to test for errors, or that sometimes the correct thing to do when an error is encountered is die. I am challenging your position that overall the software is doing what it was designed to do and this is not a bug. The assertion itself is fine - there are reasons why the cache may have been corrupted and you want to kill the program (hardware error, tampering with files, etc). However, in this case the check should have been done BEFORE the data was put into the cache, when the correct response would have been to simply reject the message. Failure to do that check is a bug.
I am confused - which was it designed to do: allow invalid data in the cache, or die when it found said invalid data in the cache? One or the other of those is a bug, not a design choice.
How do you know the admin was not held responsible? He could have been fired, demoted, etc.
If you mean why isn't the admin held responsible by the legal system, what law would allow him to be held responsible? IT admins are not sworn to duty (like police) or licensed (like professional engineers).
Your example of the city being sued does not work here. The person suing the city would be the person who was harmed by the negligence. Who, other than NASA, would have standing to sue in this case? Who would they sue, themselves?
Do you have a service level agreement stating guaranteed speeds, latencies, etc? If not, it is highly unlikely that you paid for anywhere near what you think you did. A real T1 line (1.5Mb/s) from AT&T costs $430/month. A T3 line (47MB/s) can cost up to $13000/month. The only way most people can afford internet service at all is by sharing the cost with a whole bunch of other people. Sharing the cost also means you are sharing the resource with them. Sorry, but your $50/month does not entitle you to any specific performance.
And before you say 'they shouldn't advertise it then', note that they ALWAYS say 'up to' a certain speed, and they NEVER say 'at least' such a speed.
Are you seriously claiming that there was anyone in the US in the vicinity of an operating TV or radio on the morning of 9/11 who was unaware of what was going on? By the time it was apparent that we were under attack it was already being widely covered, and the message you suggest should have been sent out in an alert was already loud and clear. Even the people on the last plane knew what was going on. An alert would have done absolutely nothing at all except possibly fuel even more panic.
The copyright holders can always do whatever they want with their code. They can certainly give different licenses to different people. The GPL does not (and can not) bind the authors at all. It is not the 'legal opinion' of programmers that matters, it is their code.
Again, what action was appropriate for an alert to urge? Especially an action that would not likely have resulted in more casualties than taking no action.
You are correct that no-one knew what was going on - which is precisely the reason no alert should be issued. What would you have had them say? Everyone get out of all buildings and stay away from all fields?
On 9/11 the only thing that was known was that planes were being used as weapons. Based on that, they took the reasonable position of getting the planes out of the sky. There was no need for an EAS to do that, because ATC and pilots are not watching TV and they could be (and were) contacted directly. What action would you have had ordinary citizens take on that day, given what was known then, and even what is known now?
Yes, if there is only one missile (and not a MIRV), and your enemy was kind enough to inform you exactly where it is going to hit. And even if there is only one missile, and you know where it is going, there is going to be retaliation and a whole lot more missiles going back and forth.
No, 9/11 was absolutely NOT the kind of emergency that the system was designed for. The purpose of the system is to save lives. What alert could have possibly been broadcast that would have saved a single life?
Wrong. I think you are confusing two things. Once you put your garbage out for collection it is no longer considered private, so someone can indeed look through it. However, it is still either yours or the collection companies property, and taking it without permission is theft.
Which of these scenarios seems more likely to you: cop holding a clipboard gets shot in the back of the head by a pro, or cop holding a clipboard gets shot by a dirtbag in a vehicle during a routine traffic stop? In the likely case, the copy doesn't have to move the clipboard at all, it will already be between his chest and the shooter, greatly cutting down the available target area. And since the guy in the car is going to be moving very quickly, he is not going to be able to take the time to consider his aim.
What does any of that have to do with this article? This has zero to do with a mainframe running (or, god forbid, ON) Windows. This is about giving a Windows server a high-speed, secure, interconnect to mainframe data (DB2, IMS, etc), and having the mainframe provide management of the Windows blade.
Windows does not run on the mainframe (z/Architecture engine). Windows runs on an Intel blade in a blade center connected to the mainframe with some high-speed links and is managed by the mainframe. The mainframe is still running z/OS, and will have the same performance and reliability characteristics it always had.
You are missing an important piece of the puzzle: software. The monthly license charge for mainframe software is proportional to the performance of the machine it is installed on. A single z196 box can have anywhere from 240 MIPS to 53000 MIPS. Mainframe customers can get exactly the performance they need for each situation, saving them tons of money on licensing.
Contrary to the impression left by the misleading title, this is NOT Windows running on a mainframe. It is Windows running on a blade in a blade center attached to and managed by the mainframe. Using a Windows (or Linux, or AIX) box to perform analytics on mainframe data is not new. What is new is the methods for getting the data from the mainframe, and the fact that the whole thing is managed by the mainframe. And in the mainframe sector, management is huge.
Isn't that just learning? You have not yet directly experienced skunk spray, so it doesn't have the same effect on you as someone who has experienced it. The area I have always lived in has a lot of skunks. Like you, the smell never bothered me all that much. Then one day our cat got sprayed, and before we knew it he was in the house. Now I absolutely can not stand that smell, no matter how far off it is.
Why should people with no kids pay school taxes? Why should people with no children in college fund public universities? Why should people who live outside the city pay tax on their cars to subsidize a subway system 90 miles away? Why should I fund state or national parks if I don't use them?
People in my area (100 miles from NYC) have an extremely heavy burden in the form of draconian land-use restrictions in order not to harm the water supply to the city. Is that fair?
You do realize that the people who 'choose' to live in the country are the ones providing YOU with your most basic needs, like food and energy, right?
It is called society. Every one gets to pitch in. Get over yourself.
First, z900 was not an entry level box, z990 was. However, that may not have been available until 2002. More importantly, you can not use GHz as any measure of mainframe speed, because not all models run at full speed.
So, using the correct numbers and comparison between the same type of box, with a single processor running at full speed, we see the following:
2001 - z900, model 101, 239 MIPS, $500,000 (don't know where you got the $1.2M from) 2011 - z196, model 701, 1202 MIPS, $1,756,000
So, IBM quintupled the speed, and raised the price 3.5x, so price/MIPS fell about 30%. Using your numbers for Dell, their price/GHz fell about 55%.
BTW - the numbers you quoted for 2011 (z114 for $75000) is a model that runs at 26 MIPS. Comparing those numbers with 2001 you find that the price/MIP actually went UP almost 40%.
Do I mind if an individual takes a picture of my house? No. Do I mind if he posts it on the internet for the world to see? Probably not. Do I mind if he posts it on the internet along with my address and GPS coordinates? Hmm, not so sure I am ok with this. Do I mind if he posts it on the internet along with my address, GPS coordinates, and name? Hey! WTF are you doing?
Each one of those things by itself may not be a problem, but the more information you aggregate the more of a problem it is. And Google seems intent on aggregating every bit of information they can get.
Slashdot Mirror
First, this has nothing to do with Microsoft, so there is no need to drag them into it.
Second, I am not questioning the need to test for errors, or that sometimes the correct thing to do when an error is encountered is die. I am challenging your position that overall the software is doing what it was designed to do and this is not a bug. The assertion itself is fine - there are reasons why the cache may have been corrupted and you want to kill the program (hardware error, tampering with files, etc). However, in this case the check should have been done BEFORE the data was put into the cache, when the correct response would have been to simply reject the message. Failure to do that check is a bug.
I am confused - which was it designed to do: allow invalid data in the cache, or die when it found said invalid data in the cache? One or the other of those is a bug, not a design choice.
How do you know the admin was not held responsible? He could have been fired, demoted, etc.
If you mean why isn't the admin held responsible by the legal system, what law would allow him to be held responsible? IT admins are not sworn to duty (like police) or licensed (like professional engineers).
Your example of the city being sued does not work here. The person suing the city would be the person who was harmed by the negligence. Who, other than NASA, would have standing to sue in this case? Who would they sue, themselves?
Do you have a service level agreement stating guaranteed speeds, latencies, etc? If not, it is highly unlikely that you paid for anywhere near what you think you did. A real T1 line (1.5Mb/s) from AT&T costs $430/month. A T3 line (47MB/s) can cost up to $13000/month. The only way most people can afford internet service at all is by sharing the cost with a whole bunch of other people. Sharing the cost also means you are sharing the resource with them. Sorry, but your $50/month does not entitle you to any specific performance.
And before you say 'they shouldn't advertise it then', note that they ALWAYS say 'up to' a certain speed, and they NEVER say 'at least' such a speed.
The system did not exist until 1997, so it is highly unlikely it was tested (intentionally or not) in 1971.
Are you seriously claiming that there was anyone in the US in the vicinity of an operating TV or radio on the morning of 9/11 who was unaware of what was going on? By the time it was apparent that we were under attack it was already being widely covered, and the message you suggest should have been sent out in an alert was already loud and clear. Even the people on the last plane knew what was going on. An alert would have done absolutely nothing at all except possibly fuel even more panic.
The copyright holders can always do whatever they want with their code. They can certainly give different licenses to different people. The GPL does not (and can not) bind the authors at all. It is not the 'legal opinion' of programmers that matters, it is their code.
Again, what action was appropriate for an alert to urge? Especially an action that would not likely have resulted in more casualties than taking no action.
You are correct that no-one knew what was going on - which is precisely the reason no alert should be issued. What would you have had them say? Everyone get out of all buildings and stay away from all fields?
On 9/11 the only thing that was known was that planes were being used as weapons. Based on that, they took the reasonable position of getting the planes out of the sky. There was no need for an EAS to do that, because ATC and pilots are not watching TV and they could be (and were) contacted directly. What action would you have had ordinary citizens take on that day, given what was known then, and even what is known now?
Yes, if there is only one missile (and not a MIRV), and your enemy was kind enough to inform you exactly where it is going to hit. And even if there is only one missile, and you know where it is going, there is going to be retaliation and a whole lot more missiles going back and forth.
No, 9/11 was absolutely NOT the kind of emergency that the system was designed for. The purpose of the system is to save lives. What alert could have possibly been broadcast that would have saved a single life?
The purpose of EAS is to alert people to take action that can save their lives, not to act as a source of breaking news.
"Incoming missiles! Get to a bomb shelter!" is a valid alert.
"Planes Hijacked!" is worthless. What action that could have been broadcast on EAS would have saved a single life?
Wrong. I think you are confusing two things. Once you put your garbage out for collection it is no longer considered private, so someone can indeed look through it. However, it is still either yours or the collection companies property, and taking it without permission is theft.
Which of these scenarios seems more likely to you: cop holding a clipboard gets shot in the back of the head by a pro, or cop holding a clipboard gets shot by a dirtbag in a vehicle during a routine traffic stop? In the likely case, the copy doesn't have to move the clipboard at all, it will already be between his chest and the shooter, greatly cutting down the available target area. And since the guy in the car is going to be moving very quickly, he is not going to be able to take the time to consider his aim.
What does any of that have to do with this article? This has zero to do with a mainframe running (or, god forbid, ON) Windows. This is about giving a Windows server a high-speed, secure, interconnect to mainframe data (DB2, IMS, etc), and having the mainframe provide management of the Windows blade.
Windows does not run on the mainframe (z/Architecture engine). Windows runs on an Intel blade in a blade center connected to the mainframe with some high-speed links and is managed by the mainframe. The mainframe is still running z/OS, and will have the same performance and reliability characteristics it always had.
You are missing an important piece of the puzzle: software. The monthly license charge for mainframe software is proportional to the performance of the machine it is installed on. A single z196 box can have anywhere from 240 MIPS to 53000 MIPS. Mainframe customers can get exactly the performance they need for each situation, saving them tons of money on licensing.
Contrary to the impression left by the misleading title, this is NOT Windows running on a mainframe. It is Windows running on a blade in a blade center attached to and managed by the mainframe. Using a Windows (or Linux, or AIX) box to perform analytics on mainframe data is not new. What is new is the methods for getting the data from the mainframe, and the fact that the whole thing is managed by the mainframe. And in the mainframe sector, management is huge.
Zero? Based on what? IBM has EAL5 on their mainframe LPARs, which would seem to be more than zero trustworthiness.
Isn't that just learning? You have not yet directly experienced skunk spray, so it doesn't have the same effect on you as someone who has experienced it. The area I have always lived in has a lot of skunks. Like you, the smell never bothered me all that much. Then one day our cat got sprayed, and before we knew it he was in the house. Now I absolutely can not stand that smell, no matter how far off it is.
I was thinking the same thing. The noise itself does not bother me, but the thought of my own fingernails doing that gives me the creeps.
Why should people with no kids pay school taxes? Why should people with no children in college fund public universities? Why should people who live outside the city pay tax on their cars to subsidize a subway system 90 miles away? Why should I fund state or national parks if I don't use them?
People in my area (100 miles from NYC) have an extremely heavy burden in the form of draconian land-use restrictions in order not to harm the water supply to the city. Is that fair?
You do realize that the people who 'choose' to live in the country are the ones providing YOU with your most basic needs, like food and energy, right?
It is called society. Every one gets to pitch in. Get over yourself.
That is the last 10 days, not month. If you look at the whole month, the price went up.
Your numbers are wrong and misleading.
First, z900 was not an entry level box, z990 was. However, that may not have been available until 2002. More importantly, you can not use GHz as any measure of mainframe speed, because not all models run at full speed.
So, using the correct numbers and comparison between the same type of box, with a single processor running at full speed, we see the following:
2001 - z900, model 101, 239 MIPS, $500,000 (don't know where you got the $1.2M from)
2011 - z196, model 701, 1202 MIPS, $1,756,000
So, IBM quintupled the speed, and raised the price 3.5x, so price/MIPS fell about 30%. Using your numbers for Dell, their price/GHz fell about 55%.
BTW - the numbers you quoted for 2011 (z114 for $75000) is a model that runs at 26 MIPS. Comparing those numbers with 2001 you find that the price/MIP actually went UP almost 40%.
IBM Closing price on Sept 23: $169.16
IBM Closing price on Oct 25: $180.36
I am not sure where the 'significant dip' comes from.
Do I mind if an individual takes a picture of my house? No.
Do I mind if he posts it on the internet for the world to see? Probably not.
Do I mind if he posts it on the internet along with my address and GPS coordinates? Hmm, not so sure I am ok with this.
Do I mind if he posts it on the internet along with my address, GPS coordinates, and name? Hey! WTF are you doing?
Each one of those things by itself may not be a problem, but the more information you aggregate the more of a problem it is. And Google seems intent on aggregating every bit of information they can get.