Here is an interesting article.
I’m really curious about the details on this one. The LSE spokesperson said the following:
“We’ve had a very good working relationship with Microsoft. This is not about moving away from Microsoft.NET. For us this is about getting control over our IT development,” he explained.
So, instead of outsourcing the development of the system, the flat out purchase the company that is developing the system.
There is no question that the outage in 2008 played a role in the decision. What I would give for the details that lead to this decision. I would love to review the architecture to see how the Windows solution was designed and compare that to the MillenniumExchange solution.
Looking at Microsoft’s own case study, found here, the solution consists of Windows Server 2003 and SQL 2000. That’s not a typo. SQL 2000!
Listening to the video, the evolution is from a mainframe to a Microsoft platform. Interestingly enough, the video shows a screen shot for SQL 2005.
Looking over a few blogs and articles, opinions slam Microsoft. However, I find it interesting how someone can have such a strong opinion when there are not enough details about the implementation of these technologies.
I’m guessing that because of SUN’s involvement, that it’s based on the J2EE technology.
Call me a geek, but if a book was written on this case study, I would be in line to buy it. Probably the only one in line, but I would be in line.
Andrew Development .Net, C#, Linux, Microsoft, Open Source, SQL