1. IBM screwed up the relationship so badly that the NYSE is walking away.
IBM supply AIX and the hardware it runs on so the NYSE isn't walking away from anything
2. IBM has some other, greater, revenue opportunity.
As a previous poster pointed out it is in IBMs best interest to upgrade it's customers to current hardware and cut down on maintenance costs on obselete hardware
No, it isn't, it's English. Or, I suppose you could call it English English. Britain includes Wales and Scotland who each have their own language, e.g. welsh & gaelic. If you want to bastardise my language then fine but don't start trying to tell me what I speak.
Arnie
Safety critical systems like this would never rely on the OS for protection. Typically the shutdown of a system like this is handled entirely in hardware. The hardware is kept happy be a regular pulse from the controller. If the controller barfs then the pulse frequency changes and the hardware shuts the system down.
That is my experience anyway. I have never worked on nuclear reactors and realise that shutting these down is a little more complicated.
I did write to my MEP (Peter Skinner) and got the following reply:
* We are not in favour of the patenting of software as in the US.
* Europe needs a uniform legal approach to stop the drifting
towards extending patentability to inventions, which would not have been
traditionally allowed, and to stop patentability of pure business
methods, algorithms or mathematical methods.
* Software products as such, must not be patented.
* Opensource software must be allowed to flourish and the
Commission must ensure that this Directive does not have any adverse
effect on opensource software and small software developers.
* Patents and the threat of litigation must not be used as an
anti-competitive weapon to squeeze out small companies.
Furthermore, the Labour Euro MPs are supporting a UK campaign for a
defence fund for small companies to protect themselves from litigation
abuse by dominant market players.
Please be assured that the Council of Ministers and the Commission
cannot ignore our views as democratically elected Members of the
European Parliament. Unless we get full agreement between the three
institutions (Parliament, Council and Commission) on this Directive,
there is no guarantee that this law will be passed.
..............
So it would appear that at least some MEPs have reservations about this and the dodgy dealings of the Commission
Slashdot Mirror
1. IBM screwed up the relationship so badly that the NYSE is walking away.
IBM supply AIX and the hardware it runs on so the NYSE isn't walking away from anything
2. IBM has some other, greater, revenue opportunity.
As a previous poster pointed out it is in IBMs best interest to upgrade it's customers to current hardware and cut down on maintenance costs on obselete hardware
Arnie
Safety critical systems like this would never rely on the OS for protection. Typically the shutdown of a system like this is handled entirely in hardware. The hardware is kept happy be a regular pulse from the controller. If the controller barfs then the pulse frequency changes and the hardware shuts the system down. That is my experience anyway. I have never worked on nuclear reactors and realise that shutting these down is a little more complicated.
I did write to my MEP (Peter Skinner) and got the following reply:
* We are not in favour of the patenting of software as in the US.
* Europe needs a uniform legal approach to stop the drifting towards extending patentability to inventions, which would not have been traditionally allowed, and to stop patentability of pure business methods, algorithms or mathematical methods.
* Software products as such, must not be patented.
* Opensource software must be allowed to flourish and the Commission must ensure that this Directive does not have any adverse effect on opensource software and small software developers.
* Patents and the threat of litigation must not be used as an anti-competitive weapon to squeeze out small companies.
Furthermore, the Labour Euro MPs are supporting a UK campaign for a defence fund for small companies to protect themselves from litigation abuse by dominant market players.
Please be assured that the Council of Ministers and the Commission cannot ignore our views as democratically elected Members of the European Parliament. Unless we get full agreement between the three institutions (Parliament, Council and Commission) on this Directive, there is no guarantee that this law will be passed.
..............
So it would appear that at least some MEPs have reservations about this and the dodgy dealings of the Commission