London Stock Exchange suffers .NET Crash

It's not the OS

I find it shortsighted that you find the sole cause of this failure to be the choice of Microsoft operating systems, db and runtime. To suggest that the same developers, following the same design, using the same processes and methodology but implementing on Linux would not suffer a similar fate is ludicrous. More at...

http://rationaltester.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/london-stock-exchange-and-windows/

Some facts are wrong...

I'm too lazy to write an essay, but the major points are as follows:

1) Sun Solaris has been open source and free for years now. You can peruse all current source code on www.opensolaris.org. You don't need to buy a license for the OpenSolaris, Enterprise, or developer edition. You can buy support for the later two if you so desire.

2) If you want to use RedHat Enterprise Linux, you have to first buy a license, and then maintain support. It's not free! Using open source code and then charging for it is not what I'd consider truly open source when compared to the other Linux distros.

3) You've also left off the fact that IBM and Sun are the 2 largest supporters to the open source community. Their innovation has helped make Linux what it is.

4) Although x86 has come a long way thanks to AMD with it's Athlon64 making Intel bring x64 into the x86 line, these processors still do not have the performance and reliability checks that big iron does.

Indian Stock Market

The explanation given is really comprehensive and informative. I am feeling happy to comment on this blog . I think this is useful information for blog users-How does the ordinary investor fit into the equation comprising of global factors coupled with manipulation in the stock markets?
1. Invest for the long-term. If you have an investment horizon of 5-10 years and are invested in the right sectors, chances are that you will gain
2. Invest money that you can afford to lose. In other words, do not put your entire life savings in the markets.
3. Study the market thoroughly before you invest
4. Avoid putting all your eggs in one basket. Hence, diversify your portfolio

Lame article

"So what really happened? I doubt we'll ever get a detailed, nitty-gritty explanation, but I have friends in London and..." now let me just make up stuff.

It is an interesting

It is an interesting article. I will not say MS is bad or Open source is good ... However it seems that there has someone inside LSE does not know what the system is really doing. Therefore, system fails at certain point and blame for the software or system.

For my experience, for mission critical system, most of my projects will go for Oracle, DB2 and MySQL. When meeting with client these years, they would like to go for opensource solution like LAMP. It really depends on the resource, if there has not many expert for the project, no matter MS or opensource solutions will fail like LSE's case.

Since we do not know what deal at what price to use the MS system, I would suggest more insider could make comment here!

Seriously Though

With that kind of money, trading, and real-time need involved, why would they attempt to save money and not choose a more robust, proven IBM system?

I can't possibly imagine it was to save money. The only reason I could think of is, they may have felt they could make more radical advances, and/or changes. For example, believing it provided a means for them to easily convert their code, and systems to something else. Maybe feeling they had more opportunity to making advances, or taking advantage of new advances. I don't know.

Don't get me wrong, I like a lot about the .NET tools, I believe there is great potential there, however, the database should never be houses in MSSQL, or MySQL as some have suggested. These are great databases, within their scope, but simply do not compare to the database systems provided by IBM.

The solution should've been .NET tools, coupled with an IBM back-end database systems. In retrospect, the deal could've been so large, that greed played a huge role in what was developed. Possibly IBM pushed too hard for them to use all of their tools, and Microsoft did the same. In that kind of scenario, cost is going to win, coupled with the feeling of resentment generated from a greedy deal.

learn on your mistakes

... and don't give your bussiness' core IT needs bilndfolded to a "big consulting company". LOL learn!

Bad workmen blame their tools

What a useless piece of ignorant and un-researched rubbish.

A good developer/architect should be able to make a good system out of any platform. The question is whether they are experienced and skilled enough to identify the strengths and drawbacks of the technology and design the solution accordingly.

There is absolutely no evidence that the crash was due to either the operating system or the development architecture.

If Microsoft are the scheming evil corporation people like you make them out to be, why don't they have people posting blogs all over the internet right now saying "I've got a friend at the LSE at they actually tell me the crash was caused by the unix-based network management systems". I suppose it's because they know those claims would only have the same credibility as your pathetic attempts to make your imaginary friends sound like real sources!