Microsoft’s Foot-in-Mouth: London Stock Exchange

Date September 8, 2008

Sometime last year, Microsoft released an ad campaign with fake newspaper headlines from a periodical called the “The Highly Reliable Times”.  With today’s news about the London Stock Exchange having a 7 hour outage I had to think back and laugh.

Exhibit A:

The Highly Reliable Times

“London Stock Exchange Chooses Windows over Linux for Reliability”

Exhibit B:

London Stock Exchange down

‘Doh!

Here’s the Reuters story, and the Slashdot link.

16 Responses to “Microsoft’s Foot-in-Mouth: London Stock Exchange”

  1. Fazendo a dancinha do bem-feito at Another Geek Blog said:

    [...] Vi primeiro aqui. [...]

  2. pharago said:

    PWNED!!!

  3. rick said:

    Nice work!

    Microsoft will be around until they untimately destroy themselves with their own shitty shit.

  4. Fakher Halim said:

    I don’t think it is fair to even suggest that Microsoft has any role in this crash.
    Particularly the .NET platform is very solid, and we should wait for their findings before speculating.

  5. Bob said:

    Probably the system was idle for a while and Windows decided to page out all the programs to achieve 80% free memory because as everyone in Redmond knows, 80% free memory is so much better than 50% free memory that we should sacrifice all performance to achieve it. Reminds me of General Peckem and his nice tight bomb pattern in Catch-22.

  6. @ fakher halim said:

    @ fakher halim
    dude did you just call windows stable? i mean really? how much have you toyed around with linux/unix environments? i mean because i have really f****** with unix and linux and i couldnt get them to crash, maybe a program hang but then you just remote log in and quit the program… but windows… ive crashed it more times than i can count…
    Im just amazed that you think that windows isnt the source of the problem. admittedly it could be bad code and any os is susceptible to bad code but…. WINDOWS SERVER SUCKS!

  7. edm said:

    well… that’s just because some manager from this stock exchange thing (a manager without a clue about IT, of course) went to a whore with a marketing guy from microsoft. and then they both fukked her and the salesman was like: now what? u buying our stuff? u know: our produxx are cool and have a colorful GUI which is very important for a server so that ANYBODY can click ANYWHERE without the need to have a clue about computing. and it is absolutely safe… as safe as fukking this whore without a condom… that is how the story went.

  8. Jim said:

    Bloody linux fanboi’s. Christ you are so desperate to make linux look good in the eyes of the world you jump on any chance to take a dig at Ms

    Linux is and always will be a nerds Os for nerds by nerds.

    Now anyone want to play half life two?

  9. linux nerd said:

    Jim: sure, I’ll play some hl2. FYI, a lot of steam games run better in linux than they do in windows, so you might consider switching if you’re a passionate gamer.

  10. Dreamtorrent said:

    I guess that for both “uber-geeks” and “uber-noobs”, both championing their own camps religiously, you get a certain amount of blindness to simple facts.

    Fact 1: Linux is NOT as user friendly as windows so long as you only need it for mundane things. The price is instability. Windows DOES have problems all of the time; I used it for 8 years and can’t count the amounts of re-installs I had to do. Even though I was good enough to fix the problems, I simply coundn’t stop them from happening. My family and friends use vista, same problems.

    Fact 2: Linux is BETTER than windows for everyday use. No defrags, spyware scans, reboots or re-install. If you want to go sudo crazy then yeah, boom, but at least you have to make an effort to make it crash whereas on windows this is a gift from the gods.

    Bad things about linux is that DX10 games, well … I expect trouble when GTA4 gets out on a PC platform. Other bad things is that when installing things from elseplace than repositories (which is never a good idea anyway) it’s compiling, trouble-shooting and all to no end (though .deb packages are a superior equivalent to m$ double-click-to-install). Plus, open source equivalents to M$ are not always available, or better.

    Bluntly: Windows is BETTER if you wish only to play DX10 games or double-click your way into disaster. Linux is BETTER if you prefer your system not to crash or are worried about spyware. Oh, and you’ll probably be disappointed that you can’t watch fancy graphics as your drive is being defragmented.

    Windows will always play a role, and never go away. It has simply managed to persuade the masses that the better a product is, the more acceptable it is to see the thing crash. And people DO accept this. Rebooting is a way of life that people don’t question.

    To be fair, I had my best gaming experiences on M$ window$. Not that this might not change in the near future.

    In grue,
    H

  11. web said:

    oathing – guess that makes micrsoft s ad redundant

  12. Animesh said:

    “Linux is NOT as user friendly as windows”

    I agree windows was made for the dumbest of users, but you know what if you make a system thinking all your users are idiots only idiots will use it. If windows is so user friendly why can’t I play my old games like “Prince of Persia, Doom etc in Windows XP”. Why my games crash with blue screens? Amazingly I can play the above mentioned games in Linux with double clicks.

    When you become used to using crappy commands then even the most complex of things seem user friendly. I am writing some document in Winword and I want to delete the next 5 words. What do u do?? Shift Arrow Arrow…till you tire out and then press delete. In VI, it’s “d5w”. Just coz you got into a bad habbit it doesn’t mean that it’s user friendly. If you get into smoking and drugs you will feel that other people who believe in healthy foods are not your type. Linux is not the problem, it’s your way of thinking that has hooked u into something close to garbage and made you pay 100$ for the same.

    People say it’s tough to install software in Linux. Have you ever thought that after installing Windows what exactly you got. It’s an empty can of garbage that you fill with more garbage downloaded from internet. In Linux you get almost everything in one single install. I don’t want to install MS Office or some drivers after installing windows. Whole windows installing with all the software requires maybe more than a day. And then if something does not work. Some webcam driver, what do you do? No you don’t call Microsoft Support. U replace the device!!

    Installing softwares is easy and so is installing viruses. Why the hell should i load something called as Norton Anti-virus, and slow down my system. It’s utter crap

    Delete a simple file in windows by mistake? Ever tried deleting win.com. Any kid can do that. What happens? Reinstall the whole damn crap again?

    Why the heck would i want to defrag my system after few months. Maybe some sort of ritual in the church to get rid of the devil. Why the stupid scan disk runs and spoils the start time.

    Why is it good to reformat the system after a year or so? It’s some of these things that have become so user friendly, that Windows has gained the status of utter most user friendliness. Why? Coz repeatitive things which are easy to do will be done the same way by idiots and experts alike. Hence majority of people using Windows and claiming that it’s user friendly, coz they can perform the cleaning up operations with ease. And thats why Microsoft Making Money.

    Windows Vista Graphics effects –> What Cost -> 150$ + The extra money that i spend on hardware. Even 2GB Ram seems less, maybe they will ask for 100000000 GIGS OF RAM in next version. Use Fedora KDE 4.1. U get better effects…fast speed…and and lesser cost. It’s the mental model that people think Why would anyone build a good system for free?

    If i report a bug in Microsoft when does it get fixed? Maybe in a year. If i report a bug in Linux it takes maybe a day or two. Why ppl work for free? Coz they love it. Somethings are done best with a free mind without thinking about the selling cost.

    Windows 95 was good, but Windows 98 crash a lot, and coming to Windows Vista it’s utter garbage. Coz it’s designed from selling perspective and for idiots…and hence the user friendliness.

    It’s not Linux that’s not the problem it’s U.

  13. WRWolfe said:

    I have to agree withe the statement that there is nothing wrong with Linux but the general publics way of thinking. I have been a Windows System Admin for years. I am in process of moving all my Windows Servers to Linux. Linux is stable, Windows locks up, reboots, Blue Screens. I have not had these issues with Linux servers or desktops unless my inexperience caused them.

    additionally – why should we pay $200 for vista, another $250 for office, another $79 for freaking antivirus, anti-spy software and then have the MS folks tell us we need to buy client access licenses to access a server we already paid too much money for the server OS
    AND Microsoft changes the rules at will… there was a point and time where you could purchase one copy of the Windows software on run on a laptop and desktop and be legit. No more.

    here’s another great one. The software OEM license that I paid for is not transferrable to my new or upgraded PC. Change the case with the OEM sticker and you loose your permanenetly affixed OEM software key. What nonsense!

    We’ve painted ourselves into a corner in a Microsoft World. Stay with MS and follow the rest of the lemmings off the cliff. Linux has a place if you use have a brain that can do more than point and click!

  14. nice said:

    ҉nice job!

  15. sandrar said:

    Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog. :) Cheers! Sandra. R.

  16. Zamana said:

    Windows is for end users.

    Linux (UNIX in general) is for servers, infra-structure.

    That is the right way to go.