-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ nessuno on Tuesday 13 Oct 2009 00:23 : \____
> <Quote>
> Dogfood?
>
> Microsoft is well known for wanting to replace competitor's
> technologies with its own. The company famously failed to do this
> after buying up HoTMaiL in 1996 and attempting to replace its Sun
> Solaris servers with PCs running NT; it similarly failed to smoothly
> transition WebTV from its original Sun-infrastructure to one based on
> Windows Server and WinCE clients in the late 90s. Microsoft also
> struggled to help Dell replace its WebObjects-based web store after
> Apple bought NeXT in 1997.
>
> Striving to rid the company of foreign technology and "eat one's own
> dog food" instead is so common that Microsoft's employees are said to
> commonly use the word "dogfooding" as a verb to describe this.
>
> Danger's Sidekick data center had "been running on autopilot for some
> time, so I don't understand why they would be spending any time
> upgrading stuff unless there was a hardware failure of some kind,"
> wrote the insider. Given Microsoft's penchant for "for running the
> latest and greatest," however, "I wouldn't be surprised if they found
> out that [storage vendor] EMC had some new SAN firmware and they just
> had to put it on the main production servers right away."
>
> A variety of "dogfooding" or aggressive upgrades could have resulted
> in data failure, the source explained, "especially when the right
> precautions haven't been taken and the people you hired to do the work
> are contractors who might not know what they're doing." The Oracle
> database Danger was using was "definitely one of the more confusing
> and troublesome to administer, from my limited experience. It's
> entirely possible that they weren't backing up the 'single copy' of
> the database properly, despite the redundant SAN and redundant
> servers."
>
> Sabotage?
>
> ...the fact that no data could be recovered after the problem erupted
> at the beginning of October suggests that the outage and the inability
> to recover any backups were the result of intentional sabotage by a
> disgruntled employee. In any other circumstance, Microsoft or T-Mobile
> would likely have come forward with an explanation of the mitigating
> circumstances, blaming bad hardware, a power failure, or some freak
> accident.
>
> An act of sabotage "would explain why neither party is releasing any
> more details: for legal reasons dealing with the ongoing investigation
> to find the culprit(s)," one of the sources said. Due to the way
> Sidekick clients interact with the service, any normal failure should
> have resulted in only a brief outage until a replacement server could
> be brought up.
>
> The very long outage of core functionality, followed by an incapacity
> to recover any data, both point to the possibility that "someone with
> access to the servers at the datacenter must have inserted a time bomb
> to wipe out not just all of the data, but also all of the backup
> tapes, and finally, I suspect, reformatting the server hard drives so
> that the service itself could not be restarted with a simple reboot
> (and to erase any traces of the time bomb itself)."...
>
> "Certainly Microsoft has armored themselves against any kind of
> similar sabotage on the Redmond side, but Danger was always run like a
> small company where individual employees had a higher level of access
> to servers and such. With Google, Amazon, and others promoting their
> own cloud services, why would anyone choose Microsoft for anything
> remotely mission critical after this fiasco?...
>
> T-Mobile angry...
>
> "T-Mobile is now getting blamed for something which isn't their fault
> at all, and a million plus customers are now seriously considering
> leaving for the iPhone or elsewhere. I'm also thinking that a class-
> action lawsuit on behalf of those users who lost all of their data
> (contacts, notes, emails, SMS's, tasks, calendar entries) is now quite
> likely, and once again T-Mobile is going to be caught in the
> crossfire, even though the servers were all run by Danger/Microsoft
> and not T-Mobile."
>
> Insiders say T-Mobile is likely to apply its Sidekick trademark to
> phones from another partner, likely Google's Android, which shares
> some commonality with Danger but lacks the same reliance upon a cloud
> services business model.
>
> Beyond T-Mobile, observers say Microsoft's problems with Danger are
> likely to reflect poorly on the company's own Azure Services cloud
> computing initiative, as well as its MyPhone cloud service for Windows
> Mobile phones. The sidelining of the Pink Project is also a likely
> setback to Microsoft's ongoing relationship with Verizon, which has
> been an early advocate of Microsoft's other mobile related
> technologies, including the DRM used in Verizon's VCast music and
> media service.
> </Quote>
>
> http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/10/12/microsofts_sidekick_pink_problems_blamed_on_dogfooding_and_sabotage.html
Do a Google search on 'Microsoft blames'...
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Play Othello: http://othellomaster.com
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/0 :0 Tue Oct 13 11:13 still logged in
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkrUapsACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7yjgCfRVFU8ptu2vX9gOoFdYO5MvMA
hSMAoIRDSuWHPUXxvPIYpTnmsHOojrqY
=ACiZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
