- Thread starter
- #41
D
dennis@home
"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message
news:KooXj.143874$Cj7.67171@pd7urf2no...
> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought the
> navy would have used something much more stable for critical operations.
> Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster them for fail
> over.
Clustering doesn't help with application software faults.
Its a common mistake people make, like thinking RAID is a substitute for
backups.
> Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if they failed in an active
> combat war zone at sea.
Any application software failing during combat could be a problem.
That is why they like mature software on military systems.
news:KooXj.143874$Cj7.67171@pd7urf2no...
> 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.