Slashdot Mirror
USDOI Goes 100% Microsoft
SatanIsHere writes: "A memo (here, here, here, and here) dated September 19th, 2002 from the Department of the Interior's Acting CIO notes the new policy of a "Department-wide standard for computer operating systems (desktop and server)" Of course the good news is that this will herald a new era in government transparancy for the Department of the Interior.
SatanIsHere Continues: "On September 13, 2002, the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget signed the attached Findings and Determination establishing Microsoft Corporation's enterprise desktop and server software as the Department-wide standard for computer operating systems (desktop and server), office automation, and asset management software.... Benefits of establishing this new Department-wide standard include:
- Lower Total Cost of Ownership for the desktop, including lower user training costs.
- Centralized and efficient security policy administration
- Greater flexibility and management functionality from products that offer a broader range of management solutions that integrate with non-Microsoft environments
- Greater productivity and reliability attributed to less downtime.
- Extended support for a large base of software applications.
Business specific application software requirements (such as Sun/Solaris, IBM, AIX, etc.) outside the established Microsoft standard may be addressed through the OCIO waiver process."
This looks to freeze out an entire Federal Department (70,000+ employees) from non-Microsoft solutions, requiring a "waiver" to use anything non-MS. One more step to complete Microsoft World Domination. This is particularly ironic considering the problems DOI has had recently regarding IT security. If this isn't leveraging a desktop monopoly into other areas I don't know what is. :-P"
Geocities/Yahoo have "Bandwidthquota" that has been used up. That quota is quite strict so its not that unfamiliar.
yush
Okay, I expect all those people complaining about the "open source must be considered" laws to start complaining about this "nothing but Windows is allowed to be considered" administrative policy.
Troll? Maybe. But I would expect those principled people who go on about the "freedom to innovate" to object to a strict Microsoft-only policy -- simply because they objected to other, less stringent policies, such as the "open source software must be considered" policies. These policies didn't rule out the use of commercial software. This policy rules out the use of anything but Microsoft software. Where's the "freedom to innovate?"
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Centralized and efficient security policy administration.
Oh, what? Surely one can pull the TP-cable out of *nix boxes too. Even the 'central' one in the basement... Security can not be a reason to use M$ software
As much as I loath to defend any decision to choose Microsoft, I still need to point out that the sentence you quote talks about policy administration WindowsNT security model is based on ACL's. Combine that with LDAP and you have a system which is ideal for centralized and efficient security policy administration. Currently, thats something that Unix just can't do, at least not on the same level as Windows can do it.
That's the kind of sh*t that pisses me off, I don't pay taxes to have the government simply hand that money to a corp. I am morally opposed to. I wouldn't mind if they simply chose the best tool for the job and the tools they needed happened to be MS software, but this just reeks.
There is absolutely NO REASON why a waiver should be needed to use something other than M$ software, that's ludicrous and stinks of corporate pandering.
* i usually stay away from using $'s in M$, but in this case i thought it was appropriate
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Much to my surprise, though, all I was able to mirror for you guys is this: http://home.centurytel.net/mraymer/sorry.gif
Never underestimate the power of a Slashdoting, I guess. ;)
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
Here is the contacts page from the DIO web site...
http://www.doi.gov/ocio/aboutus.html
Contains the names of the CIO and Deputy CIO.
No email contacts though....
...this fake distinction really bugs me.
Then change the Constitution! We live in, by word and act, a REPUBLIC thank you!
Democracy and Republic are orthogonal descriptions. There are democratic republics and non-democratic republics. Ours is democratic.
All's true that is mistrusted
I'm a sys-admin for a small school, and I'm familiar with the restrictions of a bidding process. Most likely the DOI will go through the appropriate bidding process by producing an RFP specifying a Microsoft solution, and then various vendors will bid on a systems solution centered on a Microsoft product.
By narrowing the systems specifications right down to the software vendor, a CIO can pretty much get what he/she wants. Sure, there are lots of MCSE's selling MS solutions, but if the RFP specifically requests a Microsoft product, that effectively excludes all other systems vendors.
-ted
.. and this whole thing is basically nonsense. As briancnorton said in his post, expect waivers to fly like snowflakes in a blizzard (if they even bother to try to enforce this at all.)
At the installation where I work, we've got dozens of legacy systems running on UNIX boxes as far as the eye can see. Some of these are processor-hungry image processing applications that run on high-end boxes from SGI and Sun. These systems are not going away anytime soon, regardless of what some tech-clueless bureaucrat at the top of the chain would like to think.
I'm posting this from an SGI O2, sitting on my desk next to a PC that dual boots Win2K and Linux. All of the developers in the cube farm outside my office door are doing UNIX development on Linux PCs. In the past couple of years, we have started to shun more expensive solutions in favor of software like Apache, PHP, PostgreSQL/MySQL. There are currently several efforts underway to port existing systems from proprietary UNIX (i.e., IRIX or Solaris) to Linux so that we can leverage inexpensive, commodity hardware platforms and get away from paying exorbitant maintenance fees.
We're moving pretty aggressively towards open standards and free software, and I would guess that this memo will have exactly zilch effect on that.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
Currently, thats something that Unix just can't do, at least not on the same level as Windows can do it.
Since when? Did NIS, LDAP, Kerberos, and ACLs suddenly disappear from Solaris? UNIX vendors have been selling centralized policy administration tools for years. With a little thought and planning, they can even be efficient. Many of them have very nice GUIs, too.
There are even "trusted" versions of UNIX if you want to go crazy with military-style need-to-know setups.
Basically, Microsoft is delivering nothing new, here, except more marketing spin.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
You are correct: a 100% Microsoft network is very vulnerable. I, let's say, am closely affiliated with this famous company that makes mobile phones, and it's a 100% pure Microsoft shop, including IIS, Exchange, Outlook and Office - Microsoft end to end. Well, when these mail viruses attack our IM people look like idiots. They perhaps are not idiots, but they look so helpless and inefficient, and network services just don't work.
And we're punished every time some schmuck writes one of these macrovirii, because of this uniform, Microsoft infrastructure.
Sigged!