there you go..
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| mmelchert Sep 21, 2004 5:08 AM EDT |
what bugs me most is the possibility that the nutters who were replacing a unix system by some ms-crapola will not be held accountable but instead will have some bonuses (cost savings, blah, blah, blah) just imagine, an important system has to be reset on a regular basis 'to prevent data overload' AND somebody has to initiate that by hand or even using that big spanner..., sounds like we are talking about 1930's technology. baah, I am certain there were more reliable systems around even then. |
| TxtEdMacs Sep 21, 2004 6:21 AM EDT |
I am a bit surprised this article was highly rated, since it does not specifically identify the actual failing, e.g. the server OS, the application and/or the tool that wrote the application. [c.f. some of the pro MS comments after the article, which are not all without merit.] Bit off topic: anyone notice how the threat to the Australian company was handled on slashdot? They seem much more circumspect about taking the article at face value (assuming they are citing the same source - I did not read it there)? The article implied MPAA broke Australian laws - wondering if /. is playing it safe due to the similarity of names but the copyright for completely different products with the same name should not be confusing. |
| AnonymousCoward Sep 21, 2004 6:39 PM EDT |
Not a company. They sent a C&D to Linux Australia, you know, they crew famous for their objections to the FTA, for having a big hand in goading the Aussie political parties into having a FOSS policy (and in most cases a strongly positive one at that), and so on, ad infintum? MPAA rep: "Goodness me, our automated meat-throwing machine lobbed one at a leopard's feet and now it's coming after us! I'm shocked and dismayed!" |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!