OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Managing Innovation

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@datapower.com]

> Many Unix experts sitting here dispute that. 
> They tell me Unix is the most easily hacked operating 
> system they've ever worked with.

>With all due respect, Len, I do not believe this.  Unless perhaps your 
>experts are conflating a basic Unix system with something running 
>turn-key applications.  Unless you're able to provide more information 
>(and I could well believe you can't), we'll just have to leave this 
>point in open disagreement.

That is what Spy Vs Spy means:  opinion vs opinion. But 
you can take my word for it that the sources are people with 
years of experience with Unix and VAX/VMS before that.  They 
say it is all about security maintenance and they don't have 
problems securing our local systems unless a local owner 
doesn't do the right things.  In that case, his droid is 
disconnected from the network until he cleans up his act. 
What we are experiencing is that MS product security is 
increasing rapidly and steadily.  That this is a new 
phenomenon is undeniable, but it is real.

>As for the fading dominance of Unix, etc., it's all relative.  You may 
>sell big systems, but with revenues around a half-billion, your 100-1 
>ratio is a drop in the bucket.  (BTW, I had to use Google to find those 
>numbers; using Search on www.ingr.com gets back "index is corrupt"; I 
>know your front-end claims to be IIS/4.0, so it's probably safe to 
>assume the back-end is SQLServer.  I hope those SQL worms didn't get to

Sometimes it isn't the revenue, but the kinds of systems.  We sell 
production systems to very serious people.  BTW:  we are verticalized, 
so customers vary by division.  We are not a hardware vendor and 
we don't develop core technology these days (no profit in that). 
We implement over the Microsoft platform.  Since shifting away from 
Unix, homegrown platforms, and knowledge intensive tools, we have 
become profitable and sustained that.  It makes good sense.  We 
innovate in the application domain, not the operating system layer.

A standards-based service architecture should not have to be 
distinguished by the source of the backend systems.  The key 
to competing is to recognize the migration to the services 
architecture just below the application layer.

>Is there anyone on this list who can say with a straight face that 
>Unix-like operating systems are not an important part of the computing 
>industry?  Not biggest, not smallest, just important.

No.  Just that my market doesn't consider it important and we 
don't try to influence that perception one way or another. It 
is stated in the RFPs. 



News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS