On TV.com: 11 Things U Don't Know About JOSS WHEDON
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 38 of 65:
Next »
« Previous
Now this is funny!
Windows on super clusters! Finally Microsoft has bit off more than it can chew. Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and a few others are the kings here. Okay mostly Linux but gotta give the others thier due as well. Bottom line is Microsoft needs to focus on what they do well.... okay how about fix what they have first. Either way, anybody with more than 4 brain cells about computers would never seriously run a Microsoft OS on a critical research cluster!

Here are a couple reasons why Microsoft will fail:
1 - Excessive crap in the core OS (WMP, IE, Messenger... to name 3)

2 - Stupid License set-up that restricts the end users.

3 - No access to the kernel by the user to perform many of the needed performance tweaks.

4 - Proven track record for below sub-standard security.

5 - Proven track record for instability.

6 - Inability to play nice with others in the sand box.

Bottom line is, this is a failed venture from the start. They may have the desktop... for a while longer. Main Frames, well uh sure there are a few systems out there but that is *NIX territory, and there are more than just Linux they have to go after on that front. Supercomputers and clusters, not a chance just because of how the Microsoft company culture is ingrained into total inflexible dominance. They can't buy this competitor and it's killing them on more than one front.
Posted by: Linux User 147560   Posted on: 06/23/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

LOL.. Super Flaws? Super Viruses? Super Stooopid.  Xunil_Sierutuf | 06/23/04
3 posts today, and not one of any substance...  Da-Man | 06/23/04
and he still hsn't caught up to your lack of substance standards (nt)  ryusen | 06/23/04
Bwahahaha!! Great!!  Jeff Spicoli | 06/23/04
And...  tic swayback | 06/23/04
Aww, dude...  Martin Marvinski | 06/23/04
not that i totaly agree with you either...  ryusen | 06/23/04
no need for you to  Jeff Spicoli | 06/23/04
and...  eLurker | 06/24/04
5 posts now.. and if you want to laugh, read some MS FUD  Xunil_Sierutuf | 06/23/04
Agreed...  Martin Marvinski | 06/23/04
but still...  ryusen | 06/23/04
Per CPU License?  gordon@... | 06/23/04
Per CPU License and What Else...  claytonmuhler | 06/23/04
isn't it obvious ... per PU cycle id the answer  oldskool | 06/23/04
oops, that won't work, customers only want to pay for useful cycles  oldskool | 06/23/04
High Performance Windows  MonsterPuppy | 06/23/04
its like the girl that's "half pregnant".  oldskool | 06/23/04
MS has some big shoes to try and fill...  Monkey_MCSE | 06/23/04
Manufacturers want to customize the kernel themselves.  DonnieBoy | 06/23/04
You mean a 4,096 CPU cluster doesn't have 4,096 users who need IE?  oldskool | 06/23/04
If MS Can't Create an OS without IE/WMP/GarbageEtc.  claytonmuhler | 06/23/04
Great... superfast BSODs and infections happy  MacCanuck | 06/23/04
Good! SC MS  michael-t | 06/23/04
They did not want to do this, it is a defensive move.  DonnieBoy | 06/23/04
They have been  michael-t | 06/23/04
Wrong! MS so wants to do this that they have bough customners like Cornell  oldskool | 06/24/04
Maybe you missed what I was saying. Clusters and desktops are related . .  DonnieBoy | 06/24/04
Sign me up NOW!!!!!  Mike Cox | 06/23/04
Sign me up!  georgep_z | 06/23/04
Have you joined ZDNet?  Expatriate US Geek | 06/23/04
It's a shame, Mike  Eggs Ackley_z | 06/23/04
Welcome Back, Mike!  Martin Marvinski | 06/23/04
ignorant idiot!  no_ax_to_grind_ | 06/23/04
(NT) Another NoAx Imposter ....  Plain Logic | 06/23/04
(nt) But this one sounds more intelligent.  Xunil_Sierutuf | 06/24/04
Definite 10  shallow_diver | 06/24/04
Now this is funny!  Linux User 147560 | 06/23/04
ShadeTree, ShadeTree,  Expatriate US Geek | 06/23/04
After the last  Linux User 147560 | 06/23/04
(NT) Last seen at lunch with Mike Rotch.  Plain Logic | 06/23/04
Again, Microsoft blazes old trails ...  Eggs Ackley_z | 06/23/04
Why?  rapson | 06/23/04
Parasiting  pj-xmesh | 06/23/04
What did the US Army choose for their new supercomputer?  tic swayback | 06/23/04
Army Purchasing Agents  thepubba | 06/23/04
Researched for 1.5 years...  MacCanuck | 06/24/04
Good article  Martin Marvinski | 06/23/04
Re: Army supercomputer  issthatso | 06/23/04
i doubt the OS was the deciding factor...  ryusen | 06/23/04
its also about SW investment protection  oldskool | 06/24/04
man, these guys drink too much koolaid, and don't eat enough dog food!  oldskool | 06/23/04
Icon  issthatso | 06/23/04
Mr. Clippy  MonsterPuppy | 06/23/04
YES! Great Post!  Jeff Spicoli | 06/23/04
9.5  Plain Logic | 06/23/04
Excellent! And so true from the greediest convicted monopolist in history!  Xunil_Sierutuf | 06/24/04
9.5 agreed  shallow_diver | 06/24/04
Moratorium requested  Richard Flude | 06/23/04
Unfortunately,  michael-t | 06/23/04
Unfortunately, MS is a major ZDNET sponsor ...  Plain Logic | 06/23/04
Well, yes, but everbody wants to know what MS is doing.  DonnieBoy | 06/24/04
A supercomputer  pj-xmesh | 06/23/04
Would be interesting to see  pj-xmesh | 06/23/04
Imagine how fast Blaster could spread ...  Plain Logic | 06/23/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

Meet Doc