Talk:Microsoft data loss 2009

Updated

I have put the phrase "updated to Microsoft technology" in quotes. Because this is npov, it had better be what they actually said. I can't check the source right now. We still remember what happened when they "updated" the Hotmail servers from Linux... twice. Rich Farmbrough, 20:20, 15 October 2009 (UTC).

OK the quote from the article is "the company said that the Danger datacentre had not been updated to run on Microsoft technology." Rich Farmbrough, 20:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC).

Yes, that was a direct quote from Microsoft, so it's Microsoft's explanation for what happened.--Lester 22:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Press releases

1. Acquisition [1]
2. Stabiliyt [2]
3. Recovery [3]

Rich Farmbrough, 20:30, 15 October 2009 (UTC).

Naming

I'm not sure "MS data loss" correctly qualifies the incident. Most news sources named it "Sidekick disaster", "Sidekick data loss", ... Microsoft is the parent company here (and the name, out of context, is misleading, you'd think Computer data was lost). If Hotmail or Gmail deleted all user accounts, it'd be named under these brands and not "Microsoft" or "Google" screw ups. Any objections? -- Luk ^talk 07:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I think the article name should remain Microsoft data loss 2009. It was Microsoft which lost the data. It was Microsoft's data loss. The failure occurred on Microsoft owned and operated servers. It actually was computer data that was lost, in that data is data, whether it originated from a phone or computer. That's why the world is questioning whether or not this breakdown will affect other 'cloud' services run by Microsoft. The Hiptop and Sidekick phone users will probably have their data eventually restored, judging by Microsoft's recent comments. The long-term impact will be the future of Microsoft's cloud computing business. The Sidekick telephone is more widely known internationally as the Hiptop. That's why there's no article name for Sidekick. To remove the word 'Microsoft' from the title would disconnect the article from the company responsible and most associated with the event.--Lester 10:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but the service was, and is still, advertised as Sidekick. Even our own article on the Danger_Hiptop states "all Sidekick Data users lost all data functionality". Therefore naming it as Sidekick is more accurate, the loss didn't happen on other MS services. I'm not trying to say it's not MS's responsibility and how will affect other MS businesses, just trying to be as accurate as possible. If it's been called a Sidekick outage by most sources, that's how we should name it. -- Luk ^talk 12:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind the word Sidekick being in there, but I also don't think we should remove the word Microsoft. What do you think of Microsoft Sidekick data loss? --Lester 12:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Ultimately it was Microsoft's responsibility to keep the data safe, and according to many of the sources, their negligence that resulted in its destruction. Granted T-Mobile were contracted with end users to provide the service but in terms of the data loss itself they're innocent victims too (except perhaps for due diligence). -- samj _in^out 08:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

The title of the article is misleading. Microsoft is responsible for many many services, not just sidekick, so it is quite confusing. The title seems to be a way to attack Microsoft. It is not the only company who lost data, but the only company which has a wiki article as this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.36.163 (talk) 04:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Per reference #11, shouldn't this be renamed "Oracle, Sun, Linux data loss 2009"? 72.54.164.58 (talk) 19:15, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm removing that reference, since it doesn't give any more credible source than the name "Tommy T" and a noncommittal response from Microsoft. There is nothing there to actually corroborate the claim. 213.100.138.46 (talk) 03:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I personally believe that it should be called "Microsoft data outage 2009." As Steve Ballmer said himself, it's not clear that there was any data lost, and according to everything I've read, all data was eventually restored, although it took a long time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chambo622 (talk • contribs) 05:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)