Windows Forum / Windows Vista / General Topics / May 2008
Windows Vista is slowing the Navy down ??
|
|
Thread rating:  |
hsyq8xg@gmail.com - 16 May 2008 02:41 GMT www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html
Interesting quotes --
“We have achieved the promises of Moore’s Law,”
“Much more pervasive now is the problem with software.”
“Software is getting bigger and more complex,"
"The Windows Vista operating system is so much bigger than its predecessors, that it is not any faster even though processing speeds have increased.”
= = = ==================================
DOD wants apps up to speed
Despite hardware advances, complex code and heavy traffic put a drag on systems Bloated operating systems and applications are preventing military organizations from getting sufficient speed from their information technology systems, according to several speakers at a recent Navy IT Day in Washington.
“We have achieved the promises of Moore’s Law,” the decades-old axiom that processing power would roughly double every 18 to 24 months, said Chris Miller, the Navy’s domain lead for command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (C4I).
“Much more pervasive now is the problem with software.”
“Software is getting bigger and more complex,” Miller said. “The Windows Vista operating system is so much bigger than its predecessors, [but] it is not any faster, even though processing speeds have increased.”
Elizabeth Sedlacek, director of information systems and infrastructure at the Marine Corps Systems Command, echoed Miller’s complaint. “Windows 95 required 50M of hard drive space,” she said. “Vista requires 15G.”
Part of the problem is that Moore’s Law isn’t the only one in the IT universe.
Sedlacek said increased resource requirements from the multiplication of software code illustrate an adaptation of Parkinson’s Law: software will expand to fill the resources available to it. The original Parkinson’s Law states that work would expand to fill the time available. A corollary to Parkinson’s Law states that software eventually reaches a coefficient of inefficiency, meaning that it gets so large that it no longer processes data effectively.
Sedlacek summarized her conundrum by citing yet another law. “Wirth’s Law states that software gets faster slower than hardware gets faster,” she said. According to Wirth’s law, then, software will always lag behind processing capacity.
But it wasn’t always so. “In the 1970s and 1980s, hardware processing power was wanting, and programmers had to code effectively and efficiently in order to get done what we needed to get done,” Sedlacek said. “Now that capacity has increased and the software industry is much larger, developers want to put lots of features on software and to do it quickly in order to gain a competitive advantage. Efficiency of coding is no longer a priority.”
A problem the Marines face, for example, is that they rarely operate in a resource-rich environment.
Marines are on expedition-like missions when they deploy, Sedlacek said, and they typically operate with a minimal footprint in areas of limited bandwidth. They rely on small handheld devices for information and communications.
She challenged industry to help solve the problem.
Aside from software coding, agencies could address the problem through more efficient data management.
Miller suggested that the Navy needs a data strategy for how it expands applications. Richard Hull, chief scientist at Modus Operandi, agreed in an interview with GCN that getting smarter about collecting and processing data will help software work more efficiently.
“Software gets slower because the data operating over a network is increasing faster than computer processing rates,” Hull said.
Some satellites generate several gigabytes of data per second, Hull said. “The next generation may be terabytes of information per second,” he said. “If a computer has to deal with 100 times or 1,000 times the amount of data today than it did yesterday, it’s going to be swamped.”
Hull suggested two strategies to cope with the glut of data. One involves prioritizing so that only the data most relevant to the mission is actually processed.
“A weather information system may have collected temperature once per hour, yielding 24 readings per day,” he said. “Then a new technology comes along allowing you to collect a new temperature reading every second. That’s 600 times more information than you had before.
But that doesn’t mean you need to analyze it all in depth. You’re really just interested in changes or anomalies.”
Using semantic architectures to analyze and filter data sets up hierarchies of data and processing that can help ensure that only the most interesting data climbs the ladder for in-depth analysis. “You might have a network of 64 computers filtering the data and passing up relevant data to a level consisting of 16 computers and then to eight computers,” Hull said. “This can filter out a lot of junk and provides a higher degree of fidelity in information collecting and analysis.”
Another possible solution is to use cloud computing schemes, he said. Cloud computing refers to the ability to construct ad hoc networks of computers that can share resources to tackle tough computing challenges.
An organization might have 10,000 computers at its disposal. Cloud computing provides a management structure by which, for example, 1,000 of those machines might be aggregated to solve a particular problem.
“It could take a year to build a network of
1,000 computers,” Hull said, “but the cloud computing architecture allows this to be done quickly.”
Another potential solution comes in the form of muticore processing, essentially assigning pieces of the puzzle to different processors running simultaneously on a single device. There are limitations to this approach, as there are with cloud computing, because most applications are single-threaded, Sedlacek said. Muticore central processing units do not increase computing power when the applications can’t be divvied up into discrete tasks.
The premise of multicore computing is that the computing capacity of microchips is leveling off and that the computing power inherent in existing machines must be maximized and optimized. Making that happen requires programmers to accomplish two things, said Joey Sevin, Navy programs manager at Mercury Federal Systems. They must develop a greater understanding of computer hardware, and they must do something about how they write software.
“It requires people to think differently about applications and how to write them,” Sevin said.
“Programmers are encouraged to throw off code quickly, but in the end this is very inefficient when the application is single-threaded.”
Sevin said the solution is to use middleware that can coordinate messaging among multiple processors. “What needs to happen is the adoption of a standard” for a message passing interface, he said.
MPIs would allow existing computers to distribute tasks across their existing processors and boost their processing power. The effect of distributing computing assignments across multiple processors also has the effect of making the software less complex, Sevin said.
Mercury is working on developing multiprocessor solutions for processing sensor data.
Because data collection platforms are getting smaller and more complex, Mercury wants to pool processing power to support multiple missions.
“The idea is to create an environment adaptive to different situations,” Sevin said. An unmanned aerial vehicle “may go out on a mission.
When it finishes its job and transmits its data, the computing asset may be reallocated to some other mission in another location and with a different type of sensor.”
This type of system is designed to handle two problems inherent in the collection and transmission of sensor data: latency and throughput.
Latency refers to the need for computing to function in real time. Throughput problems arise when the volume of data overwhelms processors and causes delays.
What sort of solution would the Marine Corps be most interested in? Sedlacek leaned toward simpler and leaner software. She urged industry to adopt open, modular and scalable software designs and to avoid “featuritis.” She also suggested that the Marine Corps might develop incentives for lean software design, and she urged software developers to adopt the YAGNI principle: You Ain’t Gonna Need It, so don’t code it.
= = = ==================================
www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html
Steve de Mena - 16 May 2008 05:12 GMT > www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > = = = ================================== I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are using.
Steve
John - 16 May 2008 05:51 GMT >> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Steve Advocating junk again AS USUAL I see.
Steve de Mena - 16 May 2008 06:00 GMT >>> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Advocating junk again AS USUAL I see. I was making a statement of FACT, as usual.
Steve
SG - 16 May 2008 06:17 GMT Hi Steve,
Don't think John was replying to you, but could be wrong.
 Signature All the best, SG
Is your computer system ready for Vista? https://winqual.microsoft.com/hcl/ Want to keep up with the latest news from MS? http://news.google.com/nwshp?tab=wn&ned=us&topic=t Just type in Microsoft
>>>> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Steve John - 17 May 2008 00:51 GMT >>>> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Stev No you stated NO FACT. The article clearly mentioned Vista.
Steve de Mena - 17 May 2008 06:04 GMT >>>>> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > No you stated NO FACT. The article clearly mentioned Vista. Since I know from our previous discussions that you are a little slow, I'll say it again, a little slower this time....
"I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are using."
Steve
TheZorch - 16 May 2008 08:55 GMT > I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are > using. > > Steve If they have brains they are using the SELinux which was created by the NSA. Its the most secure distribution of Linux and they encourage all branches of the government to use it instead of Windows.
--TheZorch
Steve de Mena - 16 May 2008 09:08 GMT >> I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are >> using. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > --TheZorch I think you are over-selling SELinux as to what it really is and how it was secured.
http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/info/faq.cfm#I1
"Security-enhanced Linux has no special or additional approval for government use over any other version of Linux."
NSA does not favor or promote any specific software product or platform; NSA is only promoting enhanced security.
Steve
J.O. Aho - 17 May 2008 16:43 GMT >> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are > using. There are a number of different operating systems in use at the US-armed forces including Linux and microsoft. The recent years DARPA has financed quite many Linux based projects, of course those projects usually aren't for desktop use, and of course it's cheaper to blow up a computer with Linux than one with microsoft, as you may loose the license when you no longer have the original hardware left, otherwise those missiles would need to eject the on board "computer" and the NAVY SEALS has to do "rescue" missions to retrieve those machines ;)
 Signature //Aho
Frank - 16 May 2008 06:27 GMT > www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html > [quoted text clipped - 186 lines] > > www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html They (USN) must be using that POS toy os linux cause no where does it say they're using Vista. Frank
Not Me - 16 May 2008 09:33 GMT > They (USN) must be using that POS toy os linux cause no where does it say > they're using Vista. > Frank No, actually efficiency is down because the sailors are watching the video of you chasing the sheep on you tube... it's hard to work while you are ROFL
ray - 16 May 2008 15:21 GMT >> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html > > They (USN) must be using that POS toy os linux cause no where does it > say they're using Vista. > Frank Ah, then Linux must be much more popular than I had suspected. I always assumed if it wasn't mentioned they were probably using MS - guess I was wrong.
dennis@home - 16 May 2008 16:49 GMT >>> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > assumed if it wasn't mentioned they were probably using MS - guess I was > wrong. Probably, no mention of vista gives you several choices including: linux, Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE, pSOS, DOS, and loads of others. Choose the best one for the application and everything will be fine.
-hh - 16 May 2008 18:56 GMT > ... no mention of vista gives you several > choices including: linux, Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE, > pSOS, DOS, and loads of others. Choose the best > one for the application and everything will be fine. IIRC, the USN had been using NT on some of their ships a couple of years ago.
Here's some links:
<http://www.gcn.com/print/17_17/33727-1.html>
<http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1998/07/13987>
<http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/18007/windows-nt-sinks-navy- ship.html>
These are all pretty dated; not sure if there's more current info online or not.
-hh
Ivan Marsh - 16 May 2008 19:37 GMT >> ... no mention of vista gives you several choices including: linux, >> Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE, pSOS, DOS, and loads of others. Choose the best [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > These are all pretty dated; not sure if there's more current info online > or not. Sorry... but the Yorktown meltdown had to do with a divide by zero error in the engine power interface when the operator entered zero into a data input field which was the fault of the person who programmed the control software and had nothing to do with the operating system.
*This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.*
 Signature "Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"
Moshe Goldfarb - 16 May 2008 19:44 GMT > *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I > would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* Ever been in a hospital? If so ,you already have.
Ever go to the doctor? If so, you already have.
Ever go to the dentist? If so you already have.
Ever go to the pharmacy to get medications? If so you already have.
....and so forth..
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Ivan Marsh - 16 May 2008 19:53 GMT >> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I >> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > ....and so forth.. I said I didn't WANT to know.
 Signature "Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"
Moshe Goldfarb - 16 May 2008 20:00 GMT >>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I >>> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I said I didn't WANT to know. Hahaha! Good one.
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
The Ghost In The Machine - 16 May 2008 22:06 GMT In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> wrote on Fri, 16 May 2008 13:53:47 -0500 <pan.2008.05.16.18.53.46.486748@yahoo.com>:
>>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I >>> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I said I didn't WANT to know. Well, FWIW my dentist also uses Windows to keep track of appointments. AFAIK the drilling equipment and such is not computer-controlled. I wouldn't worry unnecessarily.
Bear also in mind that Java's EULA has the following clause:
3. RESTRICTIONS. [...] You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed or intended for use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc. disclaims any express or implied warranty of fitness for such uses. [...]
(Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly intended for use in the design of nuclear facilities -- or anything else, really. It's a strange inclusion, though.)
 Signature #191, ewill3@earthlink.net "640K ought to be enough for anybody." - allegedly said by Bill Gates, 1981, but somebody had to make this up! ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Moshe Goldfarb - 16 May 2008 22:38 GMT > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh > <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > is not computer-controlled. I wouldn't worry > unnecessarily. Patient records getting mixed up, lost etc. It doesn't have to be a direct failure, like say the Xray machine controlled by Windows goes nuts. It can be secondary and certainly *can* put your health at risk.
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Ivan Marsh - 16 May 2008 22:47 GMT > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> > wrote [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > in the design of nuclear facilities -- or anything else, really. It's a > strange inclusion, though.) It's not that strange.
Microsoft's license indemnifies them from any catastrophic failure of their software.
It's sad that part of any software license pretty much says "Do not use this software to do anything important."
At least Java went to Mars.
 Signature "Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"
Moshe Goldfarb - 16 May 2008 22:57 GMT >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >> wrote [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > At least Java went to Mars. Was Java running the innards of that 40 million dollar Tonka Toy that went brain dead on Mars 10 minutes after it landed?
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Ivan Marsh - 16 May 2008 23:00 GMT >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > Was Java running the innards of that 40 million dollar Tonka Toy that > went brain dead on Mars 10 minutes after it landed? Suggesting that hitting Mars much less landing safely on the surface is trivial?
I don't know which systems Java was used in exactly... I just know it was along for the ride.
 Signature "Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"
Moshe Goldfarb - 16 May 2008 23:11 GMT >>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > Suggesting that hitting Mars much less landing safely on the surface is > trivial? Not at all.
The thing fscked up.
I'm just wondering if Java was what fscked it up.
> I don't know which systems Java was used in exactly... I just know it was > along for the ride.
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Bruce Grubb - 17 May 2008 02:55 GMT > >>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> > >>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I'm just wondering if Java was what fscked it up. Might have been who ever NASA used as the subcontracter. Remember how Lockheed Martin went off and put English standard units into equations designed for Metric units and got the Mars Climate Orbiter clobbered?
When I went to college in the mid 1980's our physics book used metric so I couldn't understand this. I mean why on Earth would anyone outside the automotive industry use English standard units?!
Moshe Goldfarb - 17 May 2008 03:01 GMT >>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Lockheed Martin went off and put English standard units into equations > designed for Metric units and got the Mars Climate Orbiter clobbered? I believe they did a similar thing with the Hubble as well. One team was using English the other metric.
Personally, as an Engineer, I could never understand the reasoning for Englsih vs MKS.
> When I went to college in the mid 1980's our physics book used metric so I > couldn't understand this. I mean why on Earth would anyone outside the > automotive industry use English standard units?! The problem is thinking and converting.
Example: Typical American (like me) knows a foot is *this long* (stretch your arms out) but has no idea how big a meter is. They are constantly trying to convert which makes a mess of things.
If they were taught in terms of MKS their would be no problem.
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Bruce Grubb - 17 May 2008 16:12 GMT > >>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> > >>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Example: Typical American (like me) knows a foot is *this long* (stretch > your arms out) but has no idea how big a meter is. I guess it is all a matter of when you grew up. My youth was filled with those little metric shows on PBS that were basically 30 min PSAs. I still remember that a meter is just a little longer than a yard, a dime is about 1 mm in thickness, and that a cubic decimeter = 1 liter = 1 kilogram which is around 2.2 pounds. I also remember the old pint is a pound (ie 16 ounces) of the common system as well.
> They are constantly trying to convert which makes a mess of things. > > If they were taught in terms of MKS their would be no problem. Strange thing is that the University of Utah taught ALL its physics courses in metric in the mid 1980's. I guess I thought that is the way all universities of that time taught their courses.
Moshe Goldfarb - 17 May 2008 16:52 GMT >>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > in metric in the mid 1980's. I guess I thought that is the way all > universities of that time taught their courses. They taught both systems when I was in engineering school in the late 70's but the MKS system was used for the courses and the English system was just taught to illustrate the differences.
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Charlie Tame - 17 May 2008 17:13 GMT >>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > in metric in the mid 1980's. I guess I thought that is the way all > universities of that time taught their courses. Well US standards ARE based on the metric system
http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/
And this is from Wikipedia
The use of two different systems was the root cause in the loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter in 1998. NASA specified metric units in the contract. NASA and other organizations worked in metric units but one subcontractor, Lockheed Martin, provided thruster performance data to the team in pound force seconds instead of newton seconds. The spacecraft was intended to orbit Mars at about 150 kilometers (93 mi) altitude, but the incorrect data meant that it probably descended instead to about 57 kilometers (35 mi), burning up in the Martian atmosphere.
Canuck57 - 17 May 2008 17:16 GMT >>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > If they were taught in terms of MKS their would be no problem. Anyone in engineering and science had better know MKS. Not 100% sure of this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the British sell gas by the litre.
Hadron - 17 May 2008 17:23 GMT >>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the > British sell gas by the litre. Is there some subtle joke in this ludicrous statement?
Canuck57 - 17 May 2008 20:43 GMT >>>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Is there some subtle joke in this ludicrous statement? Oops, no. Should read...
....but is not the US the last market on earth using imperial measurement?
The Natural Philosopher - 18 May 2008 10:44 GMT >> "Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Is there some subtle joke in this ludicrous statement? Not really. its true.
Well we sell PETROL by the litre, Gas is sold by the cu ft I believe.
Hadron - 18 May 2008 11:02 GMT >>> "Moshe Goldfarb" <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Not really. its true. Actually, no, really, it is not.
> Well we sell PETROL by the litre, Gas is sold by the cu ft I believe. So?
 Signature * SynrG notes that the number of configuration questions to answer in sendmail is NON-TRIVIAL -- Seen on #Debian
dennis@home - 17 May 2008 17:24 GMT > Anyone in engineering and science had better know MKS. Not 100% sure of > this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the > British sell gas by the litre. Well we did invent the imperial *and* metric systems.
The Natural Philosopher - 18 May 2008 10:48 GMT >> Anyone in engineering and science had better know MKS. Not 100% sure >> of this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? >> Even the British sell gas by the litre. > > Well we did invent the imperial *and* metric systems. French invented the metric system AFAICR.
Imperial was developed in Europe..hard to say that England was where it really started.
The 'Mile' is a thousand paces..standardised Roman paces..
The 'yard' is how for you can pull a bowstring, or a bolt of cloth with one hand to the body and the other extended.. etc..
Charlie Tame - 17 May 2008 17:33 GMT >>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>>>>>>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > this, but is not the US the last market on earth using metric? Even the > British sell gas by the litre. I was fortunate because before high school I learned the British system (240 pennies in the GBP etc, yards feet and inches) but when I got to high school they switched to Metric, so using both comes naturally to me.
In the 80s I worked for a US corporation and though we made all kinds of fasteners (Nuts and bolts) and sold huge quantities of Metric ones all over Europe the drawing office had to submit things to the US corporate who insisted on all measurements being in "English" units. There is some logic to this, high precision gauges are often very costly, so to draw and measure in the one standard avoids a lot of expense.
So I guess I have stayed in practice with both.
dennis@home - 17 May 2008 08:52 GMT > When I went to college in the mid 1980's our physics book used metric so I > couldn't understand this. I mean why on Earth would anyone outside the > automotive industry use English standard units?! If you look at the engineering you will find the automotive industry is metric.
Unruh - 17 May 2008 00:29 GMT >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh@yahoo.com> >>> wrote [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >> Microsoft's license indemnifies them from any catastrophic failure of >> their software. They can say anything they want in their license. the question is whetehr the courts will accept it. Eg, a ski lift operator here even had a sign disclaiming responsibil8ity if anything went wrong with the lifts. They were successfully sued then their lift broken and injured a bunch of people.
>> It's sad that part of any software license pretty much says "Do not use >> this software to do anything important." >> >> At least Java went to Mars.
>Was Java running the innards of that 40 million dollar Tonka Toy that went >brain dead on Mars 10 minutes after it landed? Moshe Goldfarb - 17 May 2008 00:38 GMT > They can say anything they want in their license. the question is whetehr > the courts will accept it. > Eg, a ski lift operator here even had a sign disclaiming responsibil8ity if > anything went wrong with the lifts. They were successfully sued then their > lift broken and injured a bunch of people. Correct. That's the old roller/ice skate rink analogy. Every one of these places has a sign that they are not resposnible for injuries. True if some idiot who has never skated before tries a "Hammil Camel" and breaks his neck due to completely to his own stupidity.
Maybe not so true if it can be proven that the ice was defective, dirty or the rental skates were poor quality or that the owner didn't police the riff raff and someone tossed a soda can under the poor bloke's skates in the middle of his performance.
It all depends......
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
the wharf rat - 16 May 2008 23:29 GMT >(Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly >intended for use in the design of nuclear facilities -- ADA?
dennis@home - 16 May 2008 23:40 GMT >>(Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly >>intended for use in the design of nuclear facilities -- > > ADA? CHILL, been a while since I used that, in fact I can't remember the syntax at all.
Canuck57 - 17 May 2008 01:07 GMT >> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I >> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Ever go to the pharmacy to get medications? > If so you already have. Have you ever run Vista? Root canals are nicer in the end, the pain goes away.
Moshe Goldfarb - 17 May 2008 01:11 GMT >>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I >>> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Have you ever run Vista? > Root canals are nicer in the end, the pain goes away. I hate Vista however I'll still give root canal the edge in pain.
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Bruce Grubb - 17 May 2008 02:59 GMT > >> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I > >> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Have you ever run Vista? > Root canals are nicer in the end, the pain goes away. My dentist uses a Macintosh :-P
Moshe Goldfarb - 17 May 2008 03:33 GMT >>>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I >>>> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > My dentist uses a Macintosh :-P My ENT does as well :)
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Canuck57 - 17 May 2008 01:05 GMT >>> ... no mention of vista gives you several choices including: linux, >>> Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE, pSOS, DOS, and loads of others. Choose the best [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I > would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.* It still highlights the general poor quality of MS-Windows programming methodologies spilling into serious software development cycles and today's design techniques. While software has become more complex, it is also true the teams developing it are much larger, better funded and generally less disciplined. We somehow think a business NET ad-hoc programmer makes a embedded systems programmer, and that is a fallacy for greed.
Quite frankly, it scares me to think MS-Windows is in command and control of some warships, or even anything else. I wouldn't even board a cruise ship if I thought it needed MS-Windows to make it go. Leave MS-Windows in the pursers office, or the cocktail lounge. But not on the trim, power, navigation -- sorry -- just don't trust the crap.
But people have already died because of MS-Windows insecurity and it isn't widely acknowledged. Take the big NE power outage a couple of years ago. At first, US said Canada did it, then Canada said the US did it. When in fact it was some Microsoft Windows virus on a SCADA control network making response so pitiful the power grid popped off line. Those dependant on electricity, say a home medical device of some sort, some died.
Cite: http://www.news.com/2100-1011_3-5063997.html
Yet we blindly fall into the pit of MS-Windows is good everywhere. When it is clearly, as in Vista's case, and unpredictable over complex piece of bloatware not fit for use anywhere except a wet fanboys dreams.
We need to get back to basics in this business and skip the caffeinated hype turkey talk.
----------- Incoming, oops, reboot - boom!
Hadron - 17 May 2008 13:11 GMT >>>> ... no mention of vista gives you several choices including: linux, >>>> Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE, pSOS, DOS, and loads of others. Choose the best [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > disciplined. We somehow think a business NET ad-hoc programmer makes a > embedded systems programmer, and that is a fallacy for greed. What a load of uninformed bullshit.
Canuck57 - 17 May 2008 00:03 GMT >> ... no mention of vista gives you several >> choices including: linux, Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE, [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > These are all pretty dated; not sure if there's more current info > online or not. I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought the navy would have used something much more stable for critical operations. Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster them for fail over. Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if they failed in an active combat war zone at sea.
Steve de Mena - 17 May 2008 00:28 GMT > I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought the > navy would have used something much more stable for critical operations. > Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster them for fail > over. Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if they failed in an > active combat war zone at sea. NT Fail? What exactly do you know about Windows NT and its stability/reliability?
Steve
Frank - 17 May 2008 00:42 GMT >> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought >> the navy would have used something much more stable for critical [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Steve Pay no attention to him. He's just an MS hating lying linux troll. Frank
Adam Albright - 17 May 2008 00:49 GMT >>> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought >>> the navy would have used something much more stable for critical [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Pay no attention to him. He's just an MS hating lying linux troll. >Frank Frank of course is a sheep molesting, pathological liar and all around putz, doofus and world class moron. We all got your number Frank. No matter what you say, we know you're a psycho, a pervert and mental midget with absolutely no redeeming qualities at all.
Moshe Goldfarb - 17 May 2008 00:55 GMT >>>> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought >>>> the navy would have used something much more stable for critical [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > matter what you say, we know you're a psycho, a pervert and mental > midget with absolutely no redeeming qualities at all. Please don't mention sheep molesting in comp.os.linux.advocacy because you are sure to wake up Roy Schestowitz.
There is good reason why he is known around the campus. as "baaaa baaa Schestowitz"
 Signature Moshe Goldfarb Collector of soaps from around the globe. Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots: http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
dennis@home - 17 May 2008 08:41 GMT > I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought the > navy would have used something much more stable for critical operations. > Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster them for fail > over. Clustering doesn't help with application software faults. Its a common mistake people make, like thinking RAID is a substitute for backups.
> Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if they failed in an active > combat war zone at sea. Any application software failing during combat could be a problem. That is why they like mature software on military systems.
Canuck57 - 17 May 2008 18:27 GMT >> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought >> the navy would have used something much more stable for critical [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Any application software failing during combat could be a problem. > That is why they like mature software on military systems. But this is my point. But maybe not clear.
Why use a complex, hard to review and less stable OS than say pSOS or vxWorks or even a skinny down version of RTOS like Linux? Why use a complex high maintenance insecure OS like NT? Seems kind of stupid as simplicity also has value in reliably, real time response and maintenance. If for nothing else, less to go wrong.
The need and use of hard drives also bothers me. Get a minor hit vibrating through the hull and the heads crash...
Agree with clustering, that is primarily for hardware faults. But it would be nice to know a war ship with nukes has more than one frail way of command and control.
Hey Scotty, come up and replace this NT DLL or hard drive so we can launch these damn things...whew...scary thought with a SU 30 or SU 47 coming at you.
dennis@home - 17 May 2008 18:54 GMT >> Any application software failing during combat could be a problem. >> That is why they like mature software on military systems. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > vxWorks or even a skinny down version of RTOS like Linux? Why use a > complex high maintenance insecure OS like NT? You have a point, I suspect that they use it because it isn't any of those things.
> Seems kind of stupid as simplicity also has value in reliably, real time > response and maintenance. It does, probably the reason they don't like big monolithic kernels much.
> If for nothing else, less to go wrong. True, but if you are doing a tactical display you would have to add so much code to pSOS/vxWorks that you would introduce more bugs than there are in an OS that has been in use (and tested) by millions for several years.
> The need and use of hard drives also bothers me. Get a minor hit > vibrating through the hull and the heads crash... Shock protection, they are used in far worse places than a war ship. They used to have HD in cruise missiles incase you didn't know (probably still do in some).
> Agree with clustering, that is primarily for hardware faults. But it > would be nice to know a war ship with nukes has more than one frail way of > command and control. It has, but that would be classified.
> Hey Scotty, come up and replace this NT DLL or hard drive so we can launch > these damn things...whew...scary thought with a SU 30 or SU 47 coming at > you. ????What - 17 May 2008 21:06 GMT > Hey Scotty, come up and replace this NT DLL or hard drive so we can launch > these damn things...whew...scary thought with a SU 30 or SU 47 coming at > you. You really are an idiot. You have no business discussing anything technical.
You'll be wise to limit your technical expertise to how to turn on the fryer to fry tacos at Taco Bell.
Canuck57 - 17 May 2008 22:08 GMT >> Hey Scotty, come up and replace this NT DLL or hard drive so we can >> launch these damn things...whew...scary thought with a SU 30 or SU 47 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You'll be wise to limit your technical expertise to how to turn on the > fryer to fry tacos at Taco Bell. Now why would I want to do that? So I could get a job as a Microsoft administrator?
DarkSentinel - 18 May 2008 18:50 GMT >>> Hey Scotty, come up and replace this NT DLL or hard drive so we can >>> launch these damn things...whew...scary thought with a SU 30 or SU 47 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Now why would I want to do that? So I could get a job as a Microsoft > administrator? At least you'll be more productive than you are in Linux.
 Signature Sanity calms, but madness is more interesting. http://www.lockergnome.com/darksentinel Undo the munge to reply by email
dennis@home - 16 May 2008 09:10 GMT A poor troll.. the important bit is
“Software gets slower because the data operating over a network is increasing faster than computer processing rates,” Hull said.
Some satellites generate several gigabytes of data per second, Hull said. “The next generation may be terabytes of information per second,” he said. “If a computer has to deal with 100 times or 1,000 times the amount of data today than it did yesterday, it’s going to be swamped.” <<<<<
Its the same for all OSes so you can insert any OS you like and the post means the same.
In fact you probably can't insert windows there at all as its unlikely to run the processing of terabytes of data from a satellite and it certainly will not be Vista as it hasn't been around long enough and is a desktop OS.
follow ups set!
Little Billy - 17 May 2008 12:02 GMT > A poor troll.. > the important bit is [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > will not be Vista as it hasn't been around long enough and is a desktop > OS. Erm, doesn't the military have operating systems that are top secret? If they use windows or any of the other large operating systems it's for normal stuff like record keeping and files. They don't guide satellites or missiles with it or navigate ships.
> follow ups set! Paul Hovnanian P.E. - 19 May 2008 03:06 GMT [snip]
> Erm, doesn't the military have operating systems that are top secret? The fact that they use a particular product might be a secret. But that product might be something available to the public, possible only slightly modified.
> If they use windows or any of the other large operating systems it's for normal > stuff like record keeping and files. Many UIs for command and control use commercial desktops.
> They don't guide satellites or missiles with it or navigate ships. The embedded s/w may indeed be special purpose. But the consoles that the operators use are standard, commercially available packages in many cases.
 Signature Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ APL is a write-only language. I can write programs in APL, but I can't read any of them. -- Roy Keir
Ivan Marsh - 19 May 2008 16:00 GMT > [snip] >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > product might be something available to the public, possible only > slightly modified. The U.S. military used to use SCO System V quite a lot. Probably still does.
 Signature "Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"
Rich - 19 May 2008 16:09 GMT >> [snip] >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The U.S. military used to use SCO System V quite a lot. Probably still > does. After watching "Inside 9-11" on the History channel last night it isn't the computers that are slowing any of the services down!.
Paul Hovnanian P.E. - 21 May 2008 04:24 GMT > > [snip] > >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The U.S. military used to use SCO System V quite a lot. Probably still > does. But that was a secret. Now they're going to have to kill you. ;-)
 Signature Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Our bombs are smarter than the average high school student. At least they can find Kuwait. - A. Whitney Brown
|
|
|