it failed in the middle of a convoluted project to tie the system in to another system in Italy.
It failed early on one of one of the biggest trading days in history - when the US federal government announced it was taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It was down for 6 hours and 45 minutes. Let me quote from that article:
Somehow "we couldn't have foreseen" and "we're confident it will not happen again" don't fit very well together.
"We have the biggest takeover in the history of the known world... and then we can't trade. It's terrible," one trader said.
The kind of folks who write software for this type of system like to audit the source for the scheduler, optimize the network stack for their own use and examine every library to figure out how to squeeze out a few extra microseconds here and there. This is not the type of stuff you do on Windows and.Net.
The prior system had 6 years of 0-nines uptime. No failures in six years. Windows and.Net couldn't squeek through three years without a catastrophic failure that shut down the entire system for nearly an entire trading day - and it failed when it mattered most.
Yeah, maybe it wasn't.Net. Maybe it wasn't Windows. I haven't seen any proof either way. Somehow I doubt they care. The company they bought cost half as much as the.Net system, and in addition to superior performance it does not have that history.
They're attempting the impossible - to catch up with the ongoing development of a closed platform. In addition to attempting to make everything they've already written stable, they've got to add in the features that come out with every new release - without seeing the code. They've got to implement invisible corner cases. The company they're following is not only not going to let up with the pace of change (relentless deprecation drives their profits) but is actively toying with them by reading their source code and finding the breaking corner cases, and implementing them intermittently to make the Mono platform appear weak to consumers and to make fixes impossible to find.
Mono will never be mature. For a smart guy, De Icaza sure is dumb - or devious.
It might just be that, having not grown up in a Microsoft culture, doing things the "One Microsoft Way" doesn't occur to them. They don't sit there saying they won't consider this or that solution because they're a "Microsoft shop". Instead, they look at the problem critically and apply logic and reason to do things the right way.
That's what I would expect, given the academic credentials given for their staff in what I've read. Folks like that don't need Microsoft to build they clicky buttons and scroll bars to do their bit - they known the technology from the bottom up.
you can't fix that problem and preserve backward compatibility.
And we all know that backward compatibility is the sacred cow that trumps even rudimentary security, right? Right?
The attitude behind your comment is the reason why Windows will never be suitable for any business or private purpose. It's not uncommon, though. You have many a kindred soul in Redmond, Washington.
You can't really expect a couple of $multi-billion proprietary software giants to keep up with a spry little 400 employee Sri Lankan linux codegeek enclave. It's just not fair.
They had $60M to throw into development. There's a good chance it's as fast as they could make it.
Also, Microsoft gets to crow about the awesome power of their platform when they "win" these big installations. It's only fair we get to revel in it when they stub their toe on them.
Instead of the $60M software product, they bought a $30M software company which had produced a competetive product. They get the code, the customers, developers, desks, servers and office space, and the managers and executives too.
That's completely different from what you said.
Likewise,
...because someone developed an application that was 2.3 milliseconds faster at a custom task...
2.3ms faster is very significant when you're starting from a base of 2.7ms. Something like six to seven times as fast.
I think that in 30 years if far better solar technology isn't as cheap and readily available as cardboard, you'll have bigger things to worry about than how to recycle your roof shingles.
The rewards are very good. Whole moons. Entire planets. Weapons that make nuclear weapons look like firecrackers. Survival for your offspring beyond the end of the Earth. Ultimately the prize is all of the universe beyond our atmosphere - more wealth than all wealth in the World, by a billion billion times.
As far as I can tell Iran's Supreme Leader is an Ayatolla. The thugs cutting people with axes in the street, who shot Neda, are some sort of informal religious moral police - acting on the orders of and with the authority of the Supreme Leader. The military may take over the government soon. The entire dialog between the protestors and the leadership is just impossible for a western mind to get around. They're raping political prisoners as a matter of policy to discourage dissent. They express a commitment to ensure a nearby nation is not just defeated, but wiped out to the last man - genocide as a mission statement.
This is just not a group I want joining the Nuclear Arsenal club. They just seem a tad too unpredictable.
There's a lot of guidance in the comments to this article on how to remove malware. It's all bogus. There is no removing malware. If the software has enough privileges to install, it not only will do so but will escalate its privileges to the maximum available and install a rootkit as soon as it can (probably the next reboot).
From there you are pwned utterly and completely. Your attempts at identification and removal do nothing except educate the new owner of your PC about the specific details of your ignorance. Your only hope of restoring control of the device is to eliminate all of the software on it. In extreme cases even this is not enough. Has your desktop background.jpg downloaded with your profile been validated? If it hasn't it can compromise IE and hence your entire system - as you log in. Is the file that infested you in My Documents on your personal share as a malformed document for a popular application? You don't know. You can't know. That's the entire point of building these systems.
Please, please stop telling people they can clean this junk. The time when a system could be cleaned is past more than five years now.
If you only knew what a program could do once it has the right to install software, how easy it is to elevate from that condition to the maximum (system) privilege after the next reboot...
There's a lot of this ignorance being propagated through slashdot in this thread and I have to think some of it is deliberate.
An app that won't uninstall, no matter what else it does, is malware. The cure for malware is to wipe and reimage. Don't try to clean a Norton install. The end user is better off with a new 500GB HDD that costs $70, a fresh OS, and their files on the recovered HDD than paying you for the extra hours of work to get their system into a "usable but known to have been compromised" condition.
A system that's known to have been compromised must be assumed to still be in that condition until it's been wiped with DBAN or an equivalent tool.
With posts like yours it's no wonder enterprises battle these monsters for months on end. It's really not that hard. The payload for all of this crud always includes rootkits you and any software you run can't see because they hook the OS at a lower level.
Some enterprises (and I'm not naming names here) don't even know that they have to build their golden image isolated from any network, especially the Internet. The state of IT infosec is pathetic but you and your customers don't have to be victims.
And don't put Norton or Symantec malware solutions in your golden image. They're vile. Peter Norton sues every few years to try to get his name back, or at least disassociated from these products, but as yet the courts still tell him "you took the money so sit down and shut up."
If an app had enough permissions to get installed it's trivial for it to elevate it to system privileges and install a rootkit that cannot be detected. Even if you remove the drive and scan it in a known-good system, there's still a chance that the product you're scanning with doesn't recognize the particular threat yet because these threats are polymorphic and the one on the scanned system may be unique.
It's scary enough that we have to trust vendor media for these closed development operating systems. It's just malpractice to claim we can restore one that has been known to be running malware to an acceptable condition.
Wipe and reimage in the case of infection. Every time. It's quicker, too.
Slashdot Mirror
A drive allows you to occupy a contiguous set of physical locations from origin to destination, optimally in a straight line.
A hyperdrive allows you to take a shortcut and skip some of the locations.
The asteroid in the picture is in fact 253 Mathilde.
He can play his songs quietly to himself, in private, which is all the right an unsigned artist is entitled to.
Probably not necessary. Lots of Googlers read slashdot.
it failed in the middle of a convoluted project to tie the system in to another system in Italy.
It failed early on one of one of the biggest trading days in history - when the US federal government announced it was taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It was down for 6 hours and 45 minutes. Let me quote from that article:
Somehow "we couldn't have foreseen" and "we're confident it will not happen again" don't fit very well together.
At the time, Reuters quoted a trader:
"We have the biggest takeover in the history of the known world ... and then we can't trade. It's terrible," one trader said.
The kind of folks who write software for this type of system like to audit the source for the scheduler, optimize the network stack for their own use and examine every library to figure out how to squeeze out a few extra microseconds here and there. This is not the type of stuff you do on Windows and .Net.
The prior system had 6 years of 0-nines uptime. No failures in six years. Windows and .Net couldn't squeek through three years without a catastrophic failure that shut down the entire system for nearly an entire trading day - and it failed when it mattered most.
Yeah, maybe it wasn't .Net. Maybe it wasn't Windows. I haven't seen any proof either way. Somehow I doubt they care. The company they bought cost half as much as the .Net system, and in addition to superior performance it does not have that history.
They're attempting the impossible - to catch up with the ongoing development of a closed platform. In addition to attempting to make everything they've already written stable, they've got to add in the features that come out with every new release - without seeing the code. They've got to implement invisible corner cases. The company they're following is not only not going to let up with the pace of change (relentless deprecation drives their profits) but is actively toying with them by reading their source code and finding the breaking corner cases, and implementing them intermittently to make the Mono platform appear weak to consumers and to make fixes impossible to find.
Mono will never be mature. For a smart guy, De Icaza sure is dumb - or devious.
It might just be that, having not grown up in a Microsoft culture, doing things the "One Microsoft Way" doesn't occur to them. They don't sit there saying they won't consider this or that solution because they're a "Microsoft shop". Instead, they look at the problem critically and apply logic and reason to do things the right way.
That's what I would expect, given the academic credentials given for their staff in what I've read. Folks like that don't need Microsoft to build they clicky buttons and scroll bars to do their bit - they known the technology from the bottom up.
you can't fix that problem and preserve backward compatibility.
And we all know that backward compatibility is the sacred cow that trumps even rudimentary security, right? Right?
The attitude behind your comment is the reason why Windows will never be suitable for any business or private purpose. It's not uncommon, though. You have many a kindred soul in Redmond, Washington.
You can't really expect a couple of $multi-billion proprietary software giants to keep up with a spry little 400 employee Sri Lankan linux codegeek enclave. It's just not fair.
throw enough specialization at it and you can get whatever you want out of it.
Apparently they threw $60,000,000 at it and couldn't get a trading system out of it. Did you read the article?
They had $60M to throw into development. There's a good chance it's as fast as they could make it.
Also, Microsoft gets to crow about the awesome power of their platform when they "win" these big installations. It's only fair we get to revel in it when they stub their toe on them.
Instead of the $60M software product, they bought a $30M software company which had produced a competetive product. They get the code, the customers, developers, desks, servers and office space, and the managers and executives too.
That's completely different from what you said.
Likewise,
...because someone developed an application that was 2.3 milliseconds faster at a custom task...
2.3ms faster is very significant when you're starting from a base of 2.7ms. Something like six to seven times as fast.
I saw that movie.
That's heresy!
At $140 a unit, it's cheaper just to carry a spare than to pay for the stupid R&D that goes into double-boot flash proms.
Unless you brick them more than half the time. Then it might pay to invest in your own PROM flashing equipment.
I think that in 30 years if far better solar technology isn't as cheap and readily available as cardboard, you'll have bigger things to worry about than how to recycle your roof shingles.
But I think we'll go ahead with our plans anyway.
The rewards are very good. Whole moons. Entire planets. Weapons that make nuclear weapons look like firecrackers. Survival for your offspring beyond the end of the Earth. Ultimately the prize is all of the universe beyond our atmosphere - more wealth than all wealth in the World, by a billion billion times.
Yes- the rewards are very good.
If Windows 7 is halfway decent all it will have cost us is nine years of Software Assurance payments.
As far as I can tell Iran's Supreme Leader is an Ayatolla. The thugs cutting people with axes in the street, who shot Neda, are some sort of informal religious moral police - acting on the orders of and with the authority of the Supreme Leader. The military may take over the government soon. The entire dialog between the protestors and the leadership is just impossible for a western mind to get around. They're raping political prisoners as a matter of policy to discourage dissent. They express a commitment to ensure a nearby nation is not just defeated, but wiped out to the last man - genocide as a mission statement.
This is just not a group I want joining the Nuclear Arsenal club. They just seem a tad too unpredictable.
Millions of people on every forum on the Internet are bashing a product they've never really spent any time with that's actually great.
That's plausible. Why didn't I think of that?
There's a lot of guidance in the comments to this article on how to remove malware. It's all bogus. There is no removing malware. If the software has enough privileges to install, it not only will do so but will escalate its privileges to the maximum available and install a rootkit as soon as it can (probably the next reboot).
From there you are pwned utterly and completely. Your attempts at identification and removal do nothing except educate the new owner of your PC about the specific details of your ignorance. Your only hope of restoring control of the device is to eliminate all of the software on it. In extreme cases even this is not enough. Has your desktop background .jpg downloaded with your profile been validated? If it hasn't it can compromise IE and hence your entire system - as you log in. Is the file that infested you in My Documents on your personal share as a malformed document for a popular application? You don't know. You can't know. That's the entire point of building these systems.
Please, please stop telling people they can clean this junk. The time when a system could be cleaned is past more than five years now.
If you only knew what a program could do once it has the right to install software, how easy it is to elevate from that condition to the maximum (system) privilege after the next reboot...
There's a lot of this ignorance being propagated through slashdot in this thread and I have to think some of it is deliberate.
An app that won't uninstall, no matter what else it does, is malware. The cure for malware is to wipe and reimage. Don't try to clean a Norton install. The end user is better off with a new 500GB HDD that costs $70, a fresh OS, and their files on the recovered HDD than paying you for the extra hours of work to get their system into a "usable but known to have been compromised" condition.
A system that's known to have been compromised must be assumed to still be in that condition until it's been wiped with DBAN or an equivalent tool.
With posts like yours it's no wonder enterprises battle these monsters for months on end. It's really not that hard. The payload for all of this crud always includes rootkits you and any software you run can't see because they hook the OS at a lower level.
Some enterprises (and I'm not naming names here) don't even know that they have to build their golden image isolated from any network, especially the Internet. The state of IT infosec is pathetic but you and your customers don't have to be victims.
And don't put Norton or Symantec malware solutions in your golden image. They're vile. Peter Norton sues every few years to try to get his name back, or at least disassociated from these products, but as yet the courts still tell him "you took the money so sit down and shut up."
If an app had enough permissions to get installed it's trivial for it to elevate it to system privileges and install a rootkit that cannot be detected. Even if you remove the drive and scan it in a known-good system, there's still a chance that the product you're scanning with doesn't recognize the particular threat yet because these threats are polymorphic and the one on the scanned system may be unique.
It's scary enough that we have to trust vendor media for these closed development operating systems. It's just malpractice to claim we can restore one that has been known to be running malware to an acceptable condition.
Wipe and reimage in the case of infection. Every time. It's quicker, too.