Re: US Navy bets on Win2K

To bring this back to an iSeries discussion, why doesn't someone (IBM)
propose
to the Navy to run the Win2k on the most reliable platform, an iSeries?

one last joke - can you say "server farm" on a ship?  maybe "server convoy?"

btw -back in '98 when the ship floated for 3 hours, there were a number of
articles
and discussions posted on the net. What is missing from some articles is
that
it did take a reboot of NT to recover from a divide by zero buffer overflow.
It's been
a couple years, but I saw some of the Navy's discussion of this on their
public web sites.
Found all of this from y2k research. Like any other Gov procurement, once a
decision
was made, nobody will dare stand up to challenge it.

jim


----- Original Message -----
From: "Buck Calabro" <Buck.Calabro@commsoft.net>
To: <midrange-l@midrange.com>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: US Navy bets on Win2K


> The slam on Windows is a bit inaccurate.
>
> Yorktown was running NT 4.0 alright, but it was a prototype version of the
> application software that crashed, not NT.  It wasn't NT that brought the
> propulsion system down, it was the propulsion software, and THAT failed
> because the prototype wasn't validity checking the input, causing a divide
> by zero.
>
> Interested readers can peruse a more even handed article on this issue at
> http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198issue/1198techbus2.html   Please bear in
mind
> that everywhere (even the Navy) there are rarely "discussions" about which
> OS is best; there are often political turf wars.  This incident appears to
> be one of them, as the main opposition to NT appears to be another vendor
> who wants to offer a Unix solution.
>
> The only reason I care is because I've been the personal target of
managers
> blaming the AS/400 for application software faults.  We lost a sale
because
> somebody at the potential client had a vague recollection that "OS/400
> sucked at journalling."  No data to back that feeling up, but what
> difference does that make in a religious argument?  This'll be my last on
> the subject, but we'd better learn how to adopt Windows technology _where
it
> makes sense_ rather than mutter about the blue screen of death ad nauseam
> and show the sign of the evil eye to ward it off.  Like it or not, Windows
> is here and it's not going away.  It's on the corporate desktop and in the
> server farm.  They have stuff we can take advantage of, to lever ourselves
> and our platform into organisations.  We are NOT going to do that by
making
> wisecracks about the sysadmin's choice of system to her boss.
>
> Isn't that very wisecracking of misinformation what's dogging the iSeries?
> We'd be better off showing off how well we play with Windows than trying
to
> show how poor Windows is.  Just my opinion, and it's worth every penny you
> all paid for it!
>   --buck
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>