Slashdot Mirror


US Army Signs $471,000,000 Deal for Microsoft Software

zero_offset writes "According to this article at Yahoo, Microsoft will provide software for 494,000 Army computers during the next six years. At roughly $950 per computer this clearly involves more than just the OS, although the article unfortunately doesn't provide details, and I was unable to find any references to this on the Microsoft website." The great things about this deal: the Army is going through a reseller, when clearly they have the purchasing power to buy direct; and most of the computers they purchase are normal consumer machines which will be purchased with Windows and Office already installed, so the Army will be paying twice for each machine.

1,260 comments

  1. Yeah Buddy! by notque · · Score: 3, Funny

    US Army Signs $471,000,000 Deal for Microsoft Software

    And if the US was a country that didn't pander to corperate intrests, the headline would read,

    "US Army Signs $0 Deal for Linux Software"

    --
    http://use.perl.org
    1. Re:Yeah Buddy! by heir2chaos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree with you that about the price of Linux, but there's obviously something more there than an operating system. They may have had a need, that their bureaucrats didn't see and open source solution for.

    2. Re:Yeah Buddy! by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 4, Funny

      C'mon, admit it. You posted that using IE on Windows.

    3. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      And if the US was a country that didn't pander to corperate intrests, the headline would read,


      No, it would read US Army signs $0 Deal for Linux software if we wanted our soldiers to "RTFM, j00 n00b l4m3r" instead of, say, killing people and breaking things.

    4. Re:Yeah Buddy! by notque · · Score: 5, Funny

      C'mon, admit it. You posted that using IE on Windows.

      Yes, but I have a valid reason.

      I.. uh... umm...

      If I used lynx, I wouldn't see Slashdot's ads, and would be circumventing the system, Which would not only be a violation of the DCMA, but would also..

      I give up. Revoke my Slashdot card.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    5. Re:Yeah Buddy! by hplasm · · Score: 1
      No, it would read US Army signs $0 Deal for Linux software if we wanted our soldiers to "RTFM, j00 n00b l4m3r" instead of, say, killing people and breaking things.

      This lets the Army concentrate on the killing, without having to worry about the breaking things, at least as far as the computers are concerned, it's taken care of automatically, as part of the OS (oid).

      --
      ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
    6. Re:Yeah Buddy! by notque · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, it would read US Army signs $0 Deal for Linux software if we wanted our soldiers to "RTFM, j00 n00b l4m3r" instead of, say, killing people and breaking things.

      Haven't you seen the commercial? All army people do is sit around and beat 14 year olds at video games.

      (This comment would have been much better had I remembered the name of the game in the commercial.)

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    7. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Open source software supports terrorism just like P2P, but fortunatly we have the DMCA, RIAA, and BSA to defend us against these injustices

    8. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You pander to corperate intrests! Ha ha! [sic]

    9. Re:Yeah Buddy! by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      It's SOCOM...and I think the guys in the tent are supposed to be real SEALs playing the game. They're sorta non-descript, all in all (could be SEALs, could be Army, etc.).

    10. Re:Yeah Buddy! by pizen · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, those were Navy Seals. All Army guys do it run around talking about being an army by themselves. I guess nobody wants to be all they can be anymore.

    11. Re:Yeah Buddy! by TopShelf · · Score: 2, Funny

      But if they did that, how would they play America's Army Operations?

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    12. Re:Yeah Buddy! by lth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "US Army Signs $0 Deal for Linux Software"

      Would you care to guestimate the cost of training users? Employing linux administrators? converting existing data? Support?

      Do you really think planners in business and the government base their decisions solely on what it costs to aquire the software?

      Sorry to pick on you - your post was obviously a joke, but also a misconception IMO.

    13. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is sad to think all that money is wasted paying for software which is probably free to the world through the Open Source Movement. We could pay our soldiers more money and train them to have high paying jobs after their service. Oh but na why do something intelligent. I mean they are only soldiers.

    14. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it would read:

      "US Army Signs $0 Deal for Linux;
      Hands over all changes to the commies, as per the GPL"

    15. Re:Yeah Buddy! by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Well, icculus recently ported it to linux.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    16. Re:Yeah Buddy! by chiseltip · · Score: 1

      It's good to finally see the Govenment spending more money to bolster our economy! Yeah George!

    17. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, I call that typical linux FUD. We always cry when poeple talk about Windows being anything other than a piece of shit, but the reality is that Linux costs a lot of money because a lot of geeks think because they know how to type into a shell that they should be making 100 grand a year... this makes the cost of owning linux high, and you have to deal with some righteous punk who thinks he's hot shit because he reads the howtos.

    18. Re:Yeah Buddy! by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...killing people and breaking things.

      You know, this story didn't really make sense to me until I read that. If your task is to kill people and break things, Windows is clearly the OS for you.

    19. Re:Yeah Buddy! by InnovativeCX · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, uh, well we'll also have to remove your tattoo.

      (pulling out a cheese grater)

      But I haven't gotten one yet...

      rats....

    20. Re:Yeah Buddy! by notque · · Score: 1

      this makes the cost of owning linux high, and you have to deal with some righteous punk who thinks he's hot shit because he reads the howtos.

      You are exactly right. If I wasn't a righteous punk who thinks he's hot shit because he reads the howtos, I might agree with you.

      But instead, I will flame you.

      You suck!

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    21. Re:Yeah Buddy! by FateCreatr · · Score: 5, Informative

      i feel i need to clear a few things up for those of you who aren't in the resale industry. first off, the article says nothing about them buying the systems from Softmart. second, since this is a 6 year agreement and it says that Softmart get's a commision, this is not a resale it's an Enterprise Agreement. that kind of contract is handled direct only and Microsoft controls the pricing, but in order to make things fair for LARs (large account resellers) the deal has to be sponcered by a LAR. that reseller get's a kickback commision (like 2%), not a sale. in an Enterprise Agreement, they are agreeing to an accross the board standard to your desktops. if that $900 figure is correct then they got a great deal because that will cover the OS, Office, and all the core CALs for 6 years, including automatic upgrade rights for anything new that comes out (which given the upgrade cycle should be about 4 new versions of each). any normal company would have to pay about 5 times more for this. just try and name a company with a large install base that wouldn't jump at 4 OS's, 4 Office's and 4 of each CAL for $900. this news shows us two things in reality. one is that there is a helluva lot of markup in this product. and second is that the miltary made a good move (or MS a bad one) because they would have bought all this anyway, but at a much higher price over time. by the way, an Enterprise Agreement is not an upfront sale but a yearly payment with true-ups.

      FateCreatr, Out.

    22. Re:Yeah Buddy! by missing000 · · Score: 1

      Or, you could look at this another way.

      Perhaps this spending is actually going into the black budget, or maybe its just going into the pockets of a well-connected reseller buddy of a US congress person.

      Whatever the case, it reminds me of us giving a lot of money to other evil people.

    23. Re:Yeah Buddy! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      Do you think said deal included the cost of training users and hiring administrators on the *Windows* side?

      Would you care to guestimate the cost of training users?

      Son, this is the *United States Army*. All they *do* is train people. And it's a pretty safe guess that all these folks are getting is Office, which could be replaced with OO.org. Not exactly a switch that requires much training.

      Employing linux administrators?

      As opposed to employing Windows administrators? As people have pointed out time and time again, the greater number of systems that a Linux admin can administer is much more than the 30% or so extra that that admin makes.

      Do you really think planners in business and the government base their decisions solely on what it costs to aquire the software?

      God, I hope not. I hope they also consider security (not a really big strength of MS products) and long term cost (getting locked into a vendor).

    24. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haha yeah I can't stand those commercials. What happened to freakin working TOGETHER? I guess we got so much of our army killed and so many rich daddies dont want their kids drafted that we have to send one-man missions to kill civillians in third world countries now.

    25. Re:Yeah Buddy! by jazman_777 · · Score: 1
      I agree with you that about the price of Linux, but there's obviously something more there than an operating system. They may have had a need, that their bureaucrats didn't see and open source solution for.

      More likely a typical government misallocation of resources.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    26. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok, 0$ for training users, less money for employing administrators (you'd need fewer of them), 0$ for converting existing data most likely (and they shouldnt be using some propriety formats for that exact reason), and as for support, why would you pay for support and have administrators too?

      I think most of us think business planners and especially the government base their buying decisions based on political allies, very little research, and personal profit.

    27. Re:Yeah Buddy! by BJZQ8 · · Score: 1

      That's exactly where it's going. In my work in schools, I see the same thing happen all of the time. We were repeatedly billed at a 100% markup for items like servers, monitors, and even floppy drives. But my superior kept on doing it, knowing full well what those same parts could be bought for (less) somewhere else. Then, of course, he always did get a nice thick green Christmas card. Money appears and disappears all the time in government...it's just that nobody has an interest in exposing any of the trillions in fraud that go on every day in this country. I tried, and got nowhere. Just lay back and let the drugs do their work, turn your head the other way.

    28. Re:Yeah Buddy! by heir2chaos · · Score: 2

      True, I work on projects for the government. They would rather spend money by dicking around, so that they don't get their budgets cut the next year, rather than to get their projects done.

    29. Re:Yeah Buddy! by fitten · · Score: 0, Troll

      I know this is mod as funny but, this scenario would be highly doubtful as they would most likely have wanted some level of support to go along with the software.

      Something that folks frequently forget is that not everyone knows how to install and support software on Linux much less install and support Linux on hardware. You cannot expect non-technical folks to do it all themselves.

    30. Re:Yeah Buddy! by macdaddy357 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm using Mozilla, Assclown! Internet Exploder is for people with VCRs flashing 12:00.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    31. Re:Yeah Buddy! by fitten · · Score: 1

      As opposed to employing Windows administrators? As people have pointed out time and time again, the greater number of systems that a Linux admin can administer is much more than the 30% or so extra that that admin makes.


      Yeah, crappy admin. Our team of 10 admin service around 11,000 computers, of which, around 2/3 are Windows boxes. Maybe you should hire admin who know what they are doing.

    32. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      true dat. also, speaking from my military expeirience, going with linux is a scary proposition for those in power. What if red hat/suse/whoever goes out of business, where do we get support? for that matter, how many linux distributors really have a support infrastructure capable of supporting an entity the size of the army? how do we get it to interoperate with the windows that all the other services are using? Again, from experience, as far as the military is concered, the most important thing for any IT product is the support provided.

    33. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Master+Bait · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It's not a great deal, it's a lousy deal. For that kind of money, they could have bought Corel outright and would have OWNED everything outright AND have a lot left over to commission many many more video games for kiddies. Now they won't own anything but a limited-time, non-transferrable lease.

      The whole US government is such a huge consumer of software, that they could save a tremendous amount of money by contracting with public universities to maintain their own Linux or BSD distro.

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    34. Re:Yeah Buddy! by arose · · Score: 2, Funny
      Would you care to guestimate the cost of training users? Employing linux administrators? converting existing data? Support?
      OK. Less then 471000000.
      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    35. Re:Yeah Buddy! by a1englishman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does the BSOD count as friendly fire?

    36. Re:Yeah Buddy! by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      And it's a pretty safe guess that all these folks are getting is Office, which could be replaced with OO.org.

      You're funny! Let's replace all Apache servers with IIS, too.

      Oh, wait. You were being serious...

    37. Re:Yeah Buddy! by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 4, Funny

      Does the BSOD count as friendly fire?

      What are you, kidding? The contract strictly stipulates that all BSODs are to be characterized as training incidents.

    38. Re:Yeah Buddy! by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1

      Yea its not like the Euros subsidize Airbus...

      --
    39. Re:Yeah Buddy! by dnoyeb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Corporate America calling Master Bait!! Hello!!

      If you don't use your $$$ you loose your $$$. If the US Army suddenly shifted to Linux, their budged would get massacred by congress.

    40. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Marc2k · · Score: 1

      "Would you care to guestimate the cost of training users? Employing linux administrators? converting existing data? Support?"
      Significantly less than $950/computer. You're still going to have to pay someone to train users, employ windows administrators, transfer existing data, and support (respectively) all of those machiens, anyway. You think any network technicians and support staff for Windows are free?

      --
      --- What
    41. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck trying to find a Windows admin who knows what he's doing!

    42. Re:Yeah Buddy! by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1


      The US Army is not in the business of producing software. Its more likely that they would be weapons manufacturer or a tank maker. I wonder why they don't?

      Really 1/2 billion over 6 years isn't alot for them. (I'm not saying that its a trival amount either)

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    43. Re:Yeah Buddy! by GnarlyNome · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hell there is an even bigger scandal brewing at NASA over sweetheart software deals being used to pump the stock of a certian Indian software company.
      I will post it when I figure out how to sanatize my source

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
    44. Re:Yeah Buddy! by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1

      In the new western culture is all about *me*; *I* should not be offended, *I* am entitled to X even though *I* did not work hard enough for it..

      --
    45. Re:Yeah Buddy! by fitten · · Score: 1

      Maybe we got em all =P

      Still, they are out there if you look for them.

    46. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Marc2k · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just curious here (because I honestly don't know), does 'over the next six years' actually mean the Army gets ALL software and revisions that come out for the products they're purchasing over the time period of the next six years? That doesn't seem to make sense. When I hear large corporations talk about anything relating to money 'over the next xx months/years/etc.', it usually means (as applied to this case) that they'll be buying $471,000,000 worth of Microsoft products spread over the next 6 years, i.e. buying 5,000 units of Win2k3 Server in 2003, 12,000 units of Longhorn and Office by 2005, etc.

      The rest of your ideas are completely logical to me, but the infinite upgrades over 6 years thing sounds kind of fishy to me.

      --
      --- What
    47. Re:Yeah Buddy! by smurf975 · · Score: 1

      YEah and if the army didn't support local business. Yeah if the army only bought European arms. Yeah if the army didn't do this a lot of jobs would have gotten lost. The point is a government would want to support its businesses and keep the money in its country.

      --
      -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
    48. Re:Yeah Buddy! by MojoMonkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He's right on track here. As a software developer for the Army we are CONSTANTLY tackling this problem. You have to remember how are operating these systems. They ARE NOT CS degrees or engineers. In fact, most do not have anything higher than a High School diploma or equivalent. We field for operational systems, both Heavy (mounted in humvees, and lights (rugged laptops)) that are being used by enlisted and junior grade officers. These guys don't give a shit about learning the wonders of the bash shell, they only want to use what they are comfortable with. And for 95% of the graduating class that's windows. We used Solaris for years with Ultras for heavys and tadpoles for lights. Guess what, they are being phased out do to complications of getting a grunt straight out of bootcamp using them. In fact, the first thing we did to try to ease the use of the solaris machine was dump CDE in favor of FVWM with a windows theme.

      You guys have to remember that there is a HUGE digital divide out there and getting soldiers with out much education comfortable with computers tends to be quicker and easier with Windows. This believe it or not does NOT boil down to money.

      --

      ----- "Blame the guy who doesn't speak English." -- Homer J. Simpson
    49. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Theaetetus · · Score: 3, Funny
      It's an Army of One! (enrollment is way down...) ;)

      -T

    50. Re:Yeah Buddy! by vrwarp · · Score: 1

      I can imagine it now... "Blue Screen Kills Thousands"

      --
      --vrwarp
    51. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Delphiki · · Score: 1
      If you're trying to kill people and break things, then you'd probably want a really reliable UNIX. If you were trying to kill people and break things using Windows, the only victim would be your computer.

      Honestly though, it doesn't bother me that the Army bought all that Microsoft software, as long as someone quite knowledgable about such things made the decision and not someone who knew not enough about computers but knew a salesman. And despite what the Linux users are going to say, Windows actually is the right way to go sometimes.

      What does bug me is why they payed so much. The Army has serious muscle in terms of buying power and in terms of having lots of people with guns. How about flexing that muscle to get a little better price, eh?

      --

      Feel free to mod me "-1 - Angry Jerk".

    52. Re:Yeah Buddy! by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Actually, I am too (Firebird 0.6). But I'm using it on Windows.

    53. Re:Yeah Buddy! by SQLz · · Score: 1

      For $490 mil, anyone could have came up with a solution.

    54. Re:Yeah Buddy! by buckinm · · Score: 1

      How about flexing that muscle to get a little better price, eh?

      You know you're talking about the $749 for a hammer people, right?

      --
      This isn't any ordinary darkness. It's advanced darkness.
    55. Re:Yeah Buddy! by notque · · Score: 1

      It's an Army of One! (enrollment is way down...) ;)

      If I had mod points, you'd so be 1 up!

      That made my day a little brighter :)

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    56. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you care to guestimate the cost of training users? Employing linux administrators? converting existing data? Support?

      OK, as long as you care to guestimate the cost of:
      1. time lost to crashes and redoing work that is lost (please, DON'T tell me how reliable win2k and XP are - I work with it daily and, altho better, it ain't crash free!)
      2. employing MCSE's - and then employing MCSE's who know what they are doing - and then employing someone who doesn't have MCSE but really DOES know what he is doing!
      3. support from MS - pls include the direct cost from MS AND the time wasted on hold waiting to get a tech in the first place AND the time wasted going thru the checklist designed to weed out the most common problems (reboot, etc.)

      Do you really think planners in business and the government base their decisions solely on what it costs to aquire the software?

      That's both a joke AND a misconception!

    57. Re:Yeah Buddy! by cmacb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I had the same experience. I never figured out if it was corruption, or just incompetence. These machines are DEFINITELY being purchased with Windows licenses already in place. Microsoft basically tells the government rep: "if you want a decent volume purchasing agreement from us you have to agree to license Windows for every PC separately". For this you get N copies of Windows, N copies of Office, and a FEW copies of some backend software like Exchange, IIS, and a few MSDN subscriptions thrown in for good measure. The Microsoft reps moan and groan and convince the government people that they have really made a great deal. The article mentions an 89 percent profit margin...I'd guess its closer to 98 percent. You don't even get a copy of the media for each machine. A few hundred CDs and an signed piece of paper and another Microsoft sales rep laughs all the way to the bank. Congratulations American taxpayer.

      PS: When it was mentioned that these machines came with Windows already install and they were essentially paying for it twice the government agent said somjething like "Well we have to wipe these machines and re-install for security reasons, so that existing copy doesn't really count".

      Nobody's that stupid right? So it HAS to be corruption. Makes me sick.

    58. Re:Yeah Buddy! by jafuser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I remember doing some volunteer work for the school system, and at nearly the end of the school year I was asked for suggestions on what to spend the remainder of the department's budget on. They didn't care what it was for or how much it cost, as long as it could be justified as being applicable to the department.

      The whole reason for this being, if they don't spend their entire budget one year, they will get cut the next...

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    59. Re:Yeah Buddy! by FroMan · · Score: 1

      This reminds me of something my wife told me:

      Hunter, fishermen, and army folks all get up before noon and want to kill things. Coincidence, I think not.

      --
      Norris/Palin 2012
      Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    60. Re:Yeah Buddy! by notque · · Score: 1

      If you don't use your $$$ you loose your $$$. If the US Army suddenly shifted to Linux, their budged would get massacred by congress.

      So use it on something else. Gee, That was simple.

      I could make some suggestions if the army would like my input.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    61. Re:Yeah Buddy! by FateCreatr · · Score: 1

      that's the whole point of an enterprise agreement, but keep in mind that is only covers the OS, office and core CALs and nothing else. also, as i mentioned, normaly it would cost 5 times more to anyone else.

    62. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Suicide · · Score: 1

      They could always, oh, pay for Linux through a service contract with one of the distros...

    63. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That $749 hammer was for working in an environment where there is a lot of flammable gas. You see, the hammer can not cause a spark, or the person using it dies. You can't simply go out and buy a $30 Eastwing for that type of environment.

    64. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "US Army Signs $0 Deal for Linux;
      Hands over all changes to the commies, as per the GPL"


      Nah, only if the army decides to SELL or otherwise DISTRIBUTE its version. They obviously will never do such a thing. So the army IS the perfect place for Linux and GPL. If you do not distribute but only use, then your changes are for you to keep. That is an intended and important feature of the GPL.

    65. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Master+Bait · · Score: 1
      My brother wrote software in ADA while in the Army.

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    66. Re:Yeah Buddy! by zakath · · Score: 1

      We used Solaris for years with Ultras for heavys and tadpoles for lights.

      Solaris w/ Ultras?? ...and how much did that cost in relation to what the author here claims MS soaked the taxpayer for? No less I'm betting. Right now the Army is probably thinking they got quite a deal with the MS boxen...

      --

    67. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (pulling out a cheese grater)

      Why use a new G5 Apple case to remove that tat? We've got lasers for that, you know.

    68. Re:Yeah Buddy! by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      I found one for $215. (check the part number against the pricing pdf at the end of the document)

      That's $530 in graft and corruption, unless, of course, you visit the terrifying idea of special ordering hammers that have ribbed handles.

    69. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Krojack · · Score: 1

      My VCR is flashing 12:00 and i'm using Galeon...
      I just don't use my VCR thus don't bother with setting the time.

      Great comment btw =)

    70. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, how about doing what we do in a typical manufacturing machine shop(a large number are high school drop outs and this is there first time using a computer). We simply (a huge team of two IS people neither of whom have degrees) create a locked down KDE or GNOME desktop containing only big ICONS to the applications the shop mechanics should be running.
      If they are as lacking in computer skills as you say, they have no business mucking around with the registry or using the command line - so what's the big deal?
      Since we did this we don't have to deal with the instability of a Windows platform and we have the level of control we need from Linux. The argument that the apps don't exist or won't run is garbage as well: We have been able to get everything from CAD programs, Visio, Office, etc. to run under Wine/other, found an app that does the same thing natively on Linux, or use a web app with a browser frontend.

    71. Re:Yeah Buddy! by BigFootApe · · Score: 1

      I can perhaps understand using Windows for office-type work. If you're doing something like artillery laying or otherwise not sitting at a desk, an embedded solution is probably more appropriate. You can simplify the interaction with the software, because the tasks are so specialized, and the user probably doesn't see the OS much at all.

      So, what are these machines for (without giving away any secrets)?

    72. Re:Yeah Buddy! by BigFootApe · · Score: 1

      Hello!! $500M = 100 tanks, or a few Apaches, or lots of UAVs, etc. Which do you think they would rather have?

    73. Re:Yeah Buddy! by MojoMonkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      So, what are these machines for (without giving away any secrets)?

      Weather systems.

      --

      ----- "Blame the guy who doesn't speak English." -- Homer J. Simpson
    74. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not a Mac if you're looking for the easier OS!

    75. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, for $490 mil, they could have hired someone to take a linux distro, or one of the BSD's, and add in everything they needed.

    76. Re:Yeah Buddy! by MojoMonkey · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't make battle hardened equipment.

      --

      ----- "Blame the guy who doesn't speak English." -- Homer J. Simpson
    77. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes - he was serious, unlike your assinine "let's replace Apache with IIS" load of crap. In case you haven't heard IIS is not only a security nightmare but, plain and simple, just another second-rate answer from M$ to an established, accepted, OSS solution that continues to rock anything M$ does.
      About a year ago the Gartner Group recommended pulling IIS out of service due to gaping, ridiculous security holes and indeed thousands of IIS-"driven" sites disappeared. You M$ morons will simply have to accept the fact that marketshare does not equate to quality. For those of us concerned with quality your software choice is a joke and these days, as foreign governments are kicking M$ crap out of their IT, it is only the lazy, stupid US consumer that clings to winblows.
      Well punk, how does it feel to be lazy and stupid?
      Well?

    78. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BUT, here we are dealing with the globocop army, the same one that uses president's club approved resellers to get toilets for a mere $600 each, where you & i can get a toilet, installed, for under $150.
      Money is no object, just raise taxes. Stop whinin' boy, we sentcha a "refund" check for your kids, noe givvit back.

    79. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure don't. They make nice soft, juicy apples(tm) fro biting in the garden of eden (b4 getting kicked the h*11 out)...

    80. Re:Yeah Buddy! by gumbysworld · · Score: 0

      How does the goverment pay for black projects???

      Over paying on public projects.

      The GOV chose MS way back in the day as their little buddy. They would help and push them. I know the lady who had the compeating OS aginst MS for the GOV. Her OS was a 1000 times better and her foucs and goals were for the end user. The GOV did not like that. MS would create jobs and sale and billions of dollars in money. Her OS worked to well.

      She got an award from the first Bush for creating a program to tell if poeple have aids over the phone.

    81. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh god people still use that stupid ass term digital divide? Hey how about Auto-divide! I need a car can the government pay for 1/2 of it for me?

      I bet you also think that kids from the inner-city need a computer in every classroom and take 8 years to learn MS office... oh wait we need to crush corprate america so let them use open office!

    82. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While it may be a buzzword and overused, it is most definately applicable to the point the parent was making. Not sure what you went on the attack, seems to me he was just pointing out the "digital divide" and made no mention on how to fix it. Calm down.

    83. Re:Yeah Buddy! by tuba_dude · · Score: 1

      And $525 toilet seats too.

      --
      "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
    84. Re:Yeah Buddy! by tuba_dude · · Score: 1

      All these other guys have great points, but a good majority of military computer systems I've seen run some kind of UNIX.

      --
      "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
    85. Re:Yeah Buddy! by tuba_dude · · Score: 1
      You think any network technicians and support staff for Windows are free?

      With the amount of useful work they do, they should be! *ducks the flames as his joke crashes and burns.*

      --
      "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
    86. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Savatte · · Score: 1

      I figured out how to make my VCR stop flashing 12:00. I unplugged it

    87. Re:Yeah Buddy! by csguy314 · · Score: 1

      Mozilla Assclown, is that in the one of the 1.4 releases? awesome!

      --
      This is left as an exercise for the reader.
    88. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand why any organization would even care to get more money when it's being wasted. So what if their budget will be cut next year, the extra money wasn't really being used for anything that important anyways so what's the big deal? Unless somehow the extra money is going into the pockets of some guys high up there I can't see why companies or organizations would care.

    89. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't you at least use Mozilla. F*cken retard.

    90. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'm another software developer for the Army

      We used Solaris for years with Ultras for heavys and tadpoles for lights.Guess what, they are being phased out do to complications of getting a grunt straight out of bootcamp using them.

      I thought the grunt straight out of bootcamp is trained to do things the Army way whether he likes it or not. The Army pays big bucks for getting some of the most effictive warfighting software on the face of the earth. Private Ryan will do whatever he's ordered to do.

      Having worked with Privates and Specialists in training exercising, I know the biggest reason they like windows is that they can play games in their spare time. Solitaire, hearts, pinball, yay.

      Sun Workstations are *NOT* being phased out to my knowledge -- some contracts are moving from Sun to windows only because they can't get their software to work under Solaris. (Ironically, they think they can do better under windows).

    91. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "US Army Signs $0 Deal for Linux Software"

      Problem with that headline. First off it would never be $0 for linux. After all, they would probably get a support contract and therefore linux never truly is free if you want support for it. They'd have to pay a fee per desktop they installed it onto so that support would only support those that were allowed to have support, therefore a license per desktop is needed to keep it in check. Would probably get it from Redhat for something like that. Typical linux zealot reply here.

    92. Re:Yeah Buddy! by flacco · · Score: 1
      Perhaps this spending is actually going into the black budget, or maybe its just going into the pockets of a well-connected reseller buddy of a US congress person.

      My thoughts exactly - especially the former.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    93. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "US Army Signs $0 Deal for Linux Software"

      Haha thats a good one. So whats the Army going to do when they are having trouble running a specific application? Read some FAQs on the web? Go on IRC and get some help? HAHAHAHAHA.

      Hint: There's more to this deal than just 'software'

    94. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun Workstations are *NOT* being phased out to my knowledge -- some contracts are moving from Sun to windows only because they can't get their software to work under Solaris. (Ironically, they think they can do better under windows).

      As yet another dev for the Army (are we the only ones left with paying jobs ;)) I'd like to respond to this comment.

      Our group is also moving from Suns to PCs. There were lots of reasons for this, a major one was in fact training, but NONE of them included not getting our software to work on Solaris. In fact, I know of a few orgs that are doing the same and ALL had running software on Solaris and are none to pleased to be porting to windows. Remember most of us Army devs are old UNIX fogies. We don't like the idea of moving to Windows any more than the slashdot community but there ARE reasons and they are NOT do to the commanding general getting a new Porshe with a MS license plate.

    95. Re:Yeah Buddy! by griffman · · Score: 1

      You care because ... next year, you might need the money. And in "zero based budgeting," it won't be there to spend next year if you don't also spend it this year.

      Smart, huh? No, I don't think so either!

      The alternative, doing a true needs-based budget for each year, seems to be overly complex for the majority of entities, be they government or private sector.

      -rob.

    96. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you care to guestimate the cost of training users? Employing linux administrators? converting existing data? Support?
      OK. Less then 471000000.


      Come on now, we mean REAL support. As in not pointing the user to a FAQ on a website, or telling them to go ask on IRC in #linux. Although the support costs for Linux might look to be less from the top, when you include all the re-training, re-building of custom apps, etc, etc.. your looking at alot more than your original figure.

    97. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Directrix1 · · Score: 1

      Would, somebody please go blow Microsoft up now. Pllleeeeeaaaaasssseeee!!! Doesn't anybody else want vengeance for the way that Microsoft is allowed to buy off our government??

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    98. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Kymermosst · · Score: 1

      You guys have to remember that there is a HUGE digital divide out there and getting soldiers with out much education comfortable with computers tends to be quicker and easier with Windows. This believe it or not does NOT boil down to money.

      Careful, you are getting really close to assuming "no education" == "stupid" or incapable of learning.

      When I was a soldier (a common soldier, straight out of high school), I learned Linux.

      When I was a soldier, we used SCO Unix in the field. Others used Solaris.

      When I was a soldier, we knew how to use DOS.

      It wasn't until around 1998 that lots of machines started coming with Windows. They still won't put Windows on some machines, and never will. (Due to the nature of their use...)

      When I was a soldier, we knew how to build networks in the barracks. We strung up Cat5 among all of us with computers, and played network games. Mostly Quake and Warcraft I/II.

      I am confident that the average soldier could use KDE and OpenOffice, no problem.

      Matter of fact, I was a soldier when I decided the KDE/GNOME debate for myself. I was still using Slackware, installed GNOME, started it up... freeze. Installed KDE, started it up... worked. Been using KDE ever since.

      they only want to use what they are comfortable with.

      Maybe some. The rest of us just wanted to use something that worked well. I'd like to see someone field a Windows-based fire support computer that blue-screened one out of a thousand times you needed to send off a call-for-fire. That is still unacceptable. I've seen machines with problems that developed on their own blue-screen one out of ten times when you tried to run Office.

      I can say one thing for SCO... one thing only. The SCO-based computer system I used *never* crashed, not once, not ever.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    99. Re:Yeah Buddy! by rsheridan6 · · Score: 1

      That's a good point, but for the amount of money they're spending on Windows, the Army could develop their own easy to use GUI programs, which would then be their own property. As it is, they'll be paying these licensing fees till hell freezes over.

      --
      Don't drop the soap, Tommy!
    100. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in other words:

      "are cadets are too stupid to click on big cartoon icons in kde or gnome....we prefer them to click on the big stupid icons in windows"

      and as someone already mentioned, every country that would see you and your buddies dead on the ground, will have the source code before you.

      and i guarantee, they WILL have people who will drop to a windows CMD or a bash shell.

      "uh sir my targeting system is offline *BOOM*"

      sniper bullet lands as enemy was able to close to within striking distance after the recon program was spoofed then taken offline.

    101. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But he's one *bad* sumbitch!

    102. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But at least they get all the known security vulnerabilities.

      You get what you pay for... oh wait, maybe you don't....

    103. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's nothing for them. It's a shitload for the people who are actually paying for it. Were you irritated by the stories about $700 hammers a few years back? $700 is nothing for the Army, but it ticks people off because they're getting an inverse volume discount, and we all pay for it.

      Half a billion dollars for 6 years worth of "upgrades" (patches for gaping security holes, more bloatware, and Clippy dressed as GI Joe?)

      M$ has proven that kicking the government's ass in court wasn't enough - now, they're gonna take on the Army and spank it!

    104. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No crap Buddy!

      I'd void enrolling too if I knew there was a good chance of me being killed. As it stands now at least.

      Very few people join the army because they want to go to war, most people join for the benefits or they get forced into it(think outside of US). Do the math.

    105. Re:Yeah Buddy! by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but if your lappy gets compromised, would you rather it's running Windows, or a tricked out OpenBSD system?

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    106. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If your task is to kill people and break things, Windows is clearly the OS for you.

      Yeah, but I thought the idea was to kill people and break things on the other side.

    107. Re:Yeah Buddy! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      [shrug] It's not really a matter of migration. If you were choosing to set up thousands of systems for the first time, yes, you could certainly choose to use IIS instead of Apache. Same with OO.org and Office.

    108. Re:Yeah Buddy! by HAL9OOO · · Score: 1

      Good to know where your tax dollars are going isn't it!

    109. Re:Yeah Buddy! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      I'm curious. What administration software do you use?

    110. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And if the US was a country that didn't pander to corperate intrests, the headline would read,
      "US Army Signs $0 Deal for Linux Software"


      Yeah right, you don't really think they are going to pay $950 for the Windows OS do you. They have to hide from congress what they are paying for their black ops...

    111. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they spend all that money, perhaps they won't have enough left to go to someone else's country and break things.

    112. Re:Yeah Buddy! by rastos1 · · Score: 1
      What if red hat/suse/whoever goes out of business, where do we get support?

      Anywhere. The source is open. OTOH, when M$ goes out of businnes (or just decideds to not support your system anymore), where do you get support?

    113. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, I know of a few orgs that are doing the same and ALL had running software on Solaris and are none to pleased to be porting to windows.

      In my experience, the programs that *I* know that moved to windows did so because they couldn't keep up with the requirements the Army was placing on them. Those programs moved to Windows to escape the requirements (think "Light"). Now the Army is catching back up with them to put the requirements that they couldn't meet under Solaris, back onto them under windows.

      The biggest reason the GRUNT's want to run windows is so they can play solitaire in the background. (I really believe this to be true. I was in the field talking to the soldiers during the exercise, and one private actually asked me if I could load some games on the box for him.)

      As FBCB2 is probably what most GRUNT's in the infantry will see, they'll be disappointed as it runs some flavor of Unix (Solaris/Linux) and won't let them load their solitaire on it.

    114. Re:Yeah Buddy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a soldier -- I'm a software guy. I think I'm familiar with the software you were using at the time. The "Call For Fire" gave you away as well as this article ;^)

      The SCO system you were referring to has been discontinued for about 3 years or so, now. It's Solaris all the way. You'll probably find it interesting that after all these years, we're still seeing hardware failures outnumber software failures.

  2. uh oh by randyest · · Score: 1, Funny

    So now, "being all that you can be" includes being frustrated and riddled with crashes? Oh, wait, that's the old slogan. Won't someone please think of our TROOPS???!?!

    --
    everything in moderation
    1. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have numerous work and personal machines (6 or so) all running XP Pro and I cannot think of the last time any one of them crashed (back through w2k).

      Most of my friends' issues aren't from the major vendors like Dell but rather self-built PC's that utilize a mishmash of buggy motherboards and the like.

      RedHat and the other major distributions seem to release major revisions far more frequently than does Microsoft. To get any meaningful support on those systems you would have to actually buy the distribution or hire someone to help if you aren't capable. Free isn't that easy.

      In the end I would take Microsoft anyday... and if anything goes severely wrong, there is always someone to hold accountable. You and I might not have the leverage, but the US military backed by a half-billion dollar contract sure will. Where is that accountablility with free software?

    2. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got the dollar figure wrong. Sorry. Let's try "half-trillion dollar" this time. Wow!

    3. Re:uh oh by geoff+lane · · Score: 2, Funny

      Accountable? Have you read the EULA?

    4. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are that naive to think that a contract of such weight with the US government doesn't bring along with it special provisions and measures tilted in the buyer's favor then you are not a businessperson.

    5. Re:uh oh by bytes256 · · Score: 0
      So now, "being all that you can be" includes being frustrated and riddled with crashes

      It's "an army of one" now...of course you can't use software from more than one company!!!

      --

      Slashdot, the site where everything's made up and the points don't matter
    6. Re:uh oh by aborchers · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, wait, that's the old slogan.


      Yeah, the new one is "Who do you want to go to war with today?"

      --
      Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
    7. Re:uh oh by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      This is probably the funniest post on the the whole damn page.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    8. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now, "being all that you can be" includes being frustrated and riddled with crashes? Oh, wait, that's the old slogan. Won't someone please think of our TROOPS???!?!

      Kind of brings a whole new meaning to "blue screen of death..."

    9. Re:uh oh by r00zky · · Score: 1

      No, no... you didn't got their strategy: they're giving that computers to the next enemy they have to fight.
      First objective is demoralizing(sp?) them with the crashes, the second is claiming they got Windows of Microsoft Destruction

      --
      I'm a chainsmokin' alcoholic sociopath, so-ci-o-path
    10. Re:uh oh by Le+Marteau · · Score: 1

      In the end I would take Microsoft anyday... and if anything goes severely wrong, there is always someone to hold accountable.

      LOL. Microsoft's accountability is limited to the cost of the software, according to the EULA. In other words, the accountability is exactly the same as open source solutions.

      --
      Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
    11. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this software is not for the battlefield. right now they still use a unix variant on the battle field. the new future combat system wont be based on microsoft products either.

    12. Re:uh oh by macdaddy357 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No one has yet mentioned security, but it will be a big problem. Microsoft software is about as secure as an unlocked door. The enemy, and terroists will exploit this. Here is further proof that there is no such thing as military intelligence.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    13. Re:uh oh by RevDobbs · · Score: 1
      but the US military backed by a half-billion dollar contract sure will. Where is that accountablility with free software?

      Shit, for less than 10 million I can get a whole dormatory of CS/Comp Eng geeks who'll administer Linux for you. Hell, make it a part of a ROTC program and kick in the cost of their exorbitant tuition to boot, and you'll have the most caffinated & available Emergancy System Administrators in the world.

    14. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cuz, as we know, there are only GOOD people in the world, well, except the US, they're all bad..Can I like, be a democrat now?

    15. Re:uh oh by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Have you read his post?

      You and I might not have the leverage, but the US military backed by a half-billion dollar contract sure will.

      For a $471 million contract, Microsoft would easily be convinced to put special terms into the contract. No one does a contract of that size without some guarantee that things will be taken care of if there's a problem.

    16. Re:uh oh by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Any data that requires a security clearance is going to be accessed and stored on a computer that doesn't have access to the public Internet.

      As for the "bad guys" using it to their advantage, well, the military's been running Microsoft for years. No major problems yet - a few public webservers hacked, but that's about it (that we know about, at least).

    17. Re:uh oh by aborchers · · Score: 1
      Can I like, be a democrat now?


      No, but you can be a humorless pudknocker hiding behing the AC shield...

      --
      Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
    18. Re:uh oh by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1

      Yes you buy redhat for 49USD, and with that get support.

      --
    19. Re:uh oh by zero_offset · · Score: 1
      Most of my friends' issues aren't from the major vendors like Dell but rather self-built PC's that utilize a mishmash of buggy motherboards and the like.

      Funny, I was just about to post the exact opposite...

      --

      Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005

    20. Re:uh oh by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "No one has yet mentioned security, but it will be a big problem."

      No one has yet mentioned that not everything made for Windows is available on Linux. A computer, no matter how secure, is useful at all if it doesn't run what you need it to run.

      Since we don't have the details about what prompted the decision, I don't see what all this judgement is about.

    21. Re:uh oh by magarity · · Score: 1

      "No one does a contract of that size without some guarantee that things will be taken care of if there's a problem."

      That might sound like a lot but notice that this would-be whopping huge amount comes to all of .1 cents per share per quarter.

    22. Re:uh oh by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      IIRC Microsoft's revenues are usually between $5 and $10 billion per quarter. That'd make this contract somewhere between 5 and 10 percent of their revenues. That's pretty substantial.

    23. Re:uh oh by crazyphilman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One of "Murphy's Laws of Combat" says, "Never forget that your weapon was manufactured by the lowest bidder". The gist of it is, basically, that you should keep in mind that the gear you're issued is crap, and you shouldn't assume it's going to work when you need it to.

      Looks like nowadays, you still get crap, but you don't get to pick low bids. Lovely. Makes me really, really glad I'm already a veteran and too old to draft or drag back in.

      --
      Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
    24. Re:uh oh by pjk · · Score: 1

      "No major problems yet" ...

      What about USS Yorkdown being 'dead in the water' for 2 and a half hours ?

      Okay it's 5 years ago, but even so ...

      --
      pjk

      --
      pjk
    25. Re:uh oh by pjrc · · Score: 1
      To get any meaningful support on those systems you would have to actually buy the distribution or hire someone to help if you aren't capable.

      And how do you "get support" for a Microsoft system, even if you have paid full price?

      Oh, I'm sure you just call that toll-free number printed on the cdrom and they just help you out at no extra charge, don't they?

    26. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Most of my friends' issues aren't from the major vendors like Dell but rather self-built PC's that utilize a mishmash of buggy motherboards and the like."

      My experience has been just the opposite, if I build the machine. And don't get me started about repairing and upgrading the likes of Dell, Gateway, etc..

    27. Re:uh oh by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      "They rushed this stuff on the ship, there was no real prototype, and then they tried to make things work as they went along."

      So, they didn't test the system before running it on their production system.

      "The source of the problem on the Yorktown was that bad data was fed into an application running on one of the 16 computers on the LAN."

      A badly written (apparently non-Microsoft) application caused a buffer overrun.

      The incident of the Yorktown going down is quoted quite often, but it really doesn't say anything about MS. It was a test run - I've fudged things up plenty of times, be it on a Linux box or a Windows box - and the reason it broke wasn't even related to Microsoft!

    28. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have numerous work and personal machines (6 or so) all running XP Pro and I cannot think of the last time any one of them crashed (back through w2k).

      Troll! Get back to work, Microsoftie!

      I have a Dell Laptop running XP Pro (yeah, all the latest updates, blah, blah, blah) right here that I am doing development work on. So far today, I have had to reboot 3 times:
      1. All the dialog boxes in Excel started to come up in Spanish! Don't ask me why, but a reboot is the only thing that would fix it!
      2. Strange message saying that " ... the keyboard driver is keeping Windows from entering power-down mode". Would not do anything except re-display the error message until I powered down! Machine would respond to CTL-ALT-DEL and reboot but reboots did not help!
      3. I am working with embedded ethernet on a product here. For no reason that I can discern, the dial-up message box comes up to ask me to dial in (XP probably wants to phone home to Redmond). This dial-up connection is what my boss uses on this laptop to connect when he is on the road. When I cancel the dial-up connection, I can no longer connect to my embedded web server (NO traffic on the ethernet at all) until I reboot the machine! This has been a recurring probelm over the last week or two.

      Yeah, M$ got rid of the bluescreens all right, but the crashes are still ther

    29. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, after recently purchasing (!) Win2k after heaving my copy of XP Pro out the Window, Microsoft Tech Support (2 free calls!) was exceedingly helpful in de-screwing their screwed-up install utility that couldn't see my hard drive.

    30. Re:uh oh by sn00ker · · Score: 1
      For a $471 million contract, Microsoft would easily be convinced to put special terms into the contract. No one does a contract of that size without some guarantee that things will be taken care of if there's a problem.
      Not only that, the contract is with the Army! You know, people with access to lots of guns and cool toys that shoot stuff.
      At an intellectual level I'm sure the sales rep knows that the military won't assault Redmond because of a few BSoDs. But at the gut level, would you really want to take the risk?

      --
      "God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr, userfriendly
    31. Re:uh oh by magarity · · Score: 1

      Ah, slashdot business calculations! Sorry, do the math, please:
      Microsoft will provide software for 494,000 Army computers during the next six years
      Six years is 24 quarters. $471 million / 24 = $19.6 million per quarter on average. MSFT revenue in the last four quarters averaged $7.8 billion (http://biz.yahoo.com/fin/l/m/msft.html). Meaning this contract represents .25% of revenue, that's a quarter of one percent, a piddly amount of the big picture.
      /businessmathlesson

    32. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do development work under Windows XP Pro using Visual C++ .NET Standard. I have uptime for weeks on end and the system only reboots when I request it. No crashes or system failures since I installed XP Pro. (about a week after it hit the stores)

      If you do dumb shit with your PC .. it is going to fuck up. Windows, Linux, it doesn't matter. The OS is only as secure and stable as the operator.

  3. Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by yatest5 · · Score: 0, Insightful

    story. Does anyone think that there should be a greater reason to post stories here than as an opportunity for 300 comments dissing MS? Sigh, let the bitching begin...

    --
    • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
    1. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by Farnite · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Does anyone think that there should be a greater reason to post stories here than as an opportunity for 300 comments dissing MS? Sigh, let the bitching begin...

      No, I don't think there needs to be any greater reason than this current one, it is a big deal that the army spends a TON Of money like this on microsoft software, and I think it's a poor decision on their part.

    2. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Why don't we just bitch about Linux and its lack of unformity on standards and bad design and mess under the hood, lack of direction and so on. BUt no that may actually help get linux moving forward.

    3. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by notque · · Score: 1, Funny

      Does anyone think that there should be a greater reason to post stories here than as an opportunity for 300 comments dissing MS?

      Yes. Bitching about SCO.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    4. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A solely political post wouldn't make it into Slashdot. A valid title would be "US Army wastes taxpayer dollars out of micromanagement fears" (long version anyway).

      I can do better than this though. I'll sell the Army as many computers as they want for $850 a pop ($100 off), and I'll even throw in the source code to everything. Ha! Top that M$!!

    5. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by leifm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, I am beginning to tire of it as well. Microsoft owns this computing paradigm like it or not. Nothing lasts forever, someday they will fall back, so lets just use our Linux boxes, keep MS at bay and either a) shut the fuck up or b) work on bringing on the next computing paradigm, whatever it may be.

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    6. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In turn, I think forgetting to preview your post, and not understanding how to use basic HTML tags was a poor decision on your part.

    7. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I run it, on VMWare. Its not ready for my native rigs, yet. 7 years Ill consider it. If it gets a clean up, standards across distros and apps. Until then, dream on.

    8. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by sporty · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      In turn, I think using the AC option was a pansy thing to do. PANSY!

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    9. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by drunk_as_in_beer · · Score: 1

      Why don't we just bitch about Linux and its lack of unformity on standards and bad design and mess under the hood, lack of direction and so on. BUt no that may actually help get linux moving forward.

      Fucking copy/paste in X is a piece of shit!

      --
      --Drunk as in Beer
    10. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by Trelane · · Score: 1

      hardly. Works great for me.

      freedesktop and linux standards base make it possible, stone-age troll monkey.

      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
    11. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by drunk_as_in_beer · · Score: 1

      It may work great for you, but its nowhere near as smooth as in Windows. I'm not trolling here. The middle click copy/paste seems to work seperately from CTRL-C/CTRL-V or Shift-Ins. Sometimes neither method works. What, am I the only one who notices this? Am I missing something that makes it work smoother?

      In Windows, you can have an application open a file dialog box, and you can copy/paste or cute/paste a file from that dialog box into a explorer window or even another file dialog box if you wanted to. Not sure if any of the toolkits for X work in this way, but I'm guessing not.

      I'm pro-Linux, but I was just trying to come up with a valid complaint in response to the message I quoted. And he had a good point, lets look at the problems with Linux and other OSS, rather than ignoring them and acting like everything is perfect, so that maybe we can improve things. I'll gladly lend my time in finding and fixing these problems.

      --
      --Drunk as in Beer
    12. Re:Yet another 'Bitch about MS' by Farnite · · Score: 0

      Yes, forgetting to preview sucks... so does forgetting a /

      However, coward, claiming I don't know how to use basic HTML tags was pretty poor yourself.

  4. Cost analysis by Jedi1USA · · Score: 1, Funny

    Insert $1000 toilet seat joke here-->

    --
    My old sig was REALLY stoopid.
    1. Re:Cost analysis by Lord+Puppet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Insert "Military Intelligence" joke here.

    2. Re:Cost analysis by pi+radians · · Score: 3, Funny

      Insert "Insert Joke" Joke here.

      --

      sin(6cos(r)+5A)
    3. Re:Cost analysis by Davak · · Score: 4, Interesting
      You deserve the Funny mod, no doubt.

      But a recent West Wing episode pops into my head.

      West Winger staff member is complaining about the ridiculous amounts of money spent in the military for routine items. The military guy smashes an ashtray on his desk... and it breaks into only three pieces.

      He goes on to explain that the ashtray costs $400 to research and to make; however, whenever you are in a sub, the ashtray won't break into millions of bits during combat action.

      Anyway, I've looked at military spending differently since that episode...

      Oh, and Microsoft sucks... blah, blah, blah...

      Davak
    4. Re:Cost analysis by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't strike me as surprising that the West Wing producers are so clueless about the military and the real world and stuff that they don't recognize smoking wouldn't be allowed on a submarine.

    5. Re:Cost analysis by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      * Ass gaskets not included

    6. Re:Cost analysis by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      While some military acquitistions are overpriced ($400 hammers, etc), some are justified by the need to make them more rugged for military use. It has always been my belief that the high costs are used to camoflauge secret and black op projects.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    7. Re:Cost analysis by gateep · · Score: 1

      Insert "Insert ""Insert Joke"" Jok.. nah, forget it.

    8. Re:Cost analysis by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 3, Funny

      Insert "Recursive Joke" Joke Here

    9. Re:Cost analysis by sammy+baby · · Score: 2, Informative

      It doesn't strike me as surprising that some random guy on Slashdot would post that smoking "wouldn't be allowed on a submarine," despite the fact that this study in 1996 was intended to estimate the effects of secondhand smoke on submarine crews, and this Navy News update from 1993 notes that sub captains were tasked with designating smoking areas for their crews while on board.

      Depressing, but not surprising.

    10. Re:Cost analysis by aurelian · · Score: 1

      it does strike me as surprising that smoking is allowed on submarines. but then who the fuck wants to be on a submarine anyway.

    11. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insert "Soviet Russia" joke here.

    12. Re:Cost analysis by ichimunki · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Jebus Crisis. Just make the ashtray out of metal, then it won't break at all. And what are they doing smoking in a sub anyway, can you say very tight environment with a limited supply of air?

      Not that this invalidates your basic premise, that many military-grade goods are specially made to military spec and therefore justifiably cost more. However, I have to wonder how any Microsoft product meets the kind of quality standards set for even a simple ashtray.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    13. Re:Cost analysis by ldspartan · · Score: 2, Informative
      You beat me to it :).

      According to my extensive reading of Tom Clancy non-fiction (no, really... I'm too poor to buy the Jane's reference manuals), submarine ventilation / air purification systems are specifically designed to handle cigarrette smoke. Remember that most sub designs predate concerns about secondhand smoke and so forth.

      Also, see this instruction from the Secretary of the Navy dated August 2002.

      I quote:
      "On Submarines. Smoking spaces shall be designated aboard submarines following the guidance of reference (e). These spaces must be well ventilated, not in the vicinity of stationary watch stations. Berthing spaces, messes, lounges, and exercise areas shall not be designated as smoking areas. The number of smokers authorized to use a smoking area at one time shall be limited by the clearance capacity of the ventilation system."


      Hurrah for /.'s readership.
    14. Re:Cost analysis by GMontag · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Interesting that West Wing used (plagiarized is too strong) a bit from the VP Albert Gore, Jr. "reintventing government" tour of the early 1990's. When on "Late Night with David Letterman" his props were a big glass gov't standard ashtray, a big nail, a hammer and a block of wood.

      He then went on bust the ashtray and explain how the pieces would be evaluated to decide if those types of ashtrays would be purchased by and for the feds.

      I am pretty sure that the Letterman show was not the only stop on the tour.

    15. Re:Cost analysis by hughk · · Score: 1
      It has always been my belief that the high costs are used to camoflauge secret and black op projects.
      You mean, like retirement funds?
      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    16. Re:Cost analysis by Roger+Wernersson · · Score: 1

      Your're allowed to smoke on a submarine?

      --
      temporarily sigless
    17. Re:Cost analysis by fitten · · Score: 1

      Jebus Crisis. Just make the ashtray out of metal, then it won't break at all.

      But it could clang around a lot....

    18. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "Soviet Russia" Joke Inserts YOU!

    19. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "however, whenever you are in a sub, the ashtray won't break into millions of bits during combat action."

      Since when are soldiers allowed to smoke on a sub? You do realize that West Wing is just a fictional television series, right?

      BTW, this post took $10642 to research and create. Notice how, in a slashdot situation, it is slightly insulting, but not enough to be considered flamebait.

    20. Re:Cost analysis by Rai · · Score: 2, Informative

      Reminds me of a story I once heard (don't know if it's true or not.)

      During the early NASA days, they had a hard time developing a pen that would write in zero gravity, but after spending a rather large sum of money, they made one.

      When faced with the same delema, the Soviet space program used a pencil.

    21. Re:Cost analysis by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 1

      Insert "stop command" here

    22. Re:Cost analysis by GlassUser · · Score: 1

      What did they do with the shavings?

    23. Re:Cost analysis by schon · · Score: 1

      He goes on to explain that the ashtray costs $400 to research and to make; however, whenever you are in a sub, the ashtray won't break into millions of bits during combat action.

      Did someone then point out that they could have made the ashtrays out of cast aluminum, saved themselves $390, and had an ashtray that won't break at all during combat action?

    24. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did they do with the shavings?

      Perhaps they waited until they got back on the ground before they emptied the sharpener. :o)

    25. Re:Cost analysis by gabriel · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's an old story. The problem with pencils is that they're made of graphite, which is a wonderful conductor of electricity, among other problems.

      See http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.htm
      for the full story

    26. Re:Cost analysis by One+Louder · · Score: 2, Informative

      Pretty story. Not true.

    27. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And what are they doing smoking in a sub anyway, can you say very tight environment with a limited supply of air?

      I also thought it was dumb to allow smoking on a submarine, but think about it. These ships are often out to sea for 6 months at a time. What are the odds that you could put together a crew of 130-150 non-smokers for every active submarine?

    28. Re:Cost analysis by Bvardi · · Score: 1

      "West Winger staff member is complaining about the ridiculous amounts of money spent in the military for routine items. The military guy smashes an ashtray on his desk... and it breaks into only three pieces.

      He goes on to explain that the ashtray costs $400 to research and to make; however, whenever you are in a sub, the ashtray won't break into millions of bits during combat action."

      Personally if someone pointed this out to me I'd then ask the question "Why the hell would you permit smoking in a submarine anyways, and why can't you make the ashtray out of tin?"

      I mean I know several cities thinking of restricting smoking in public places.... which aren't underwater, cramped, and sharing the same air with a fair sized crew.... though I admit, it's probably much harder to make people pop outside for a smoke break when you are on the third week of a two month underwater ride.

    29. Re:Cost analysis by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      Sounds like smoking is only allowed in the reactor room :-)

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    30. Re:Cost analysis by FroMan · · Score: 1

      No biggie. Just ask them to smoke outside, like we do at restaurants.

      Sure, you may wind up with fewer sailors on your way home, but hey, some how Kirk managed to keep enough crew after every other red shirt turned into a smoking hole in the ground.

      --
      Norris/Palin 2012
      Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    31. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Not so much anymore though. Its up to the XO of the ship. Its usually limited to particular times and locations.

    32. Re:Cost analysis by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Now what I want to know is do they let you get all cocked and fucked up on alcohol on a submarine? If not, why should they allow one addiction to flourish, and not another. All that smoke CAN'T be good for the filters... At least you know the alcohol is helping clean out the waste disposal system...

    33. Re:Cost analysis by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 1

      Ok, like everyone else said, that's a tv show, metal ash trays, smoking on subs?
      But here is a real case: the army buys optics for their rifles now from US Optics (or plan to). These scopes are anywhere from $3000-5000 each. Put that on on the rail of a $2000 rifle, with other goodies and you have one very expensive gun. You can however, unmount the scope from your M4, hammer a nail or two, remount it and it will keep its zero. This is probably a better example than safety glass ash trays.

      --


      TallGreen CMS hosting
    34. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, Graphite is a form of carbon. An insulator. It's resistance is very high.

      the only thing that *doesn't* conduct electricity (until coronal discharge) is a vacuum. It's just some have higher resistance than others.

    35. Re:Cost analysis by gearheadsmp · · Score: 1

      Anyone who like big torpedoes.

    36. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether a material is an insulator or not depends on its bonding structure; some forms of carbon may be insulators, while others conduct. Graphite, as a matter of fact, does not have a "very high" resistance, just moderately high. You can use graphite resistors in meaningful ways in circuits.

    37. Re:Cost analysis by istartedi · · Score: 1

      What are the odds that you could put together a crew of 130-150 non-smokers for every active submarine?

      Pretty good. It's the Navy. Just order them not to smoke. Make it a disqualification, like bedwetting or overt homosexuality. If they can't quit, transfer them to a garbage ship. What's long is the odds that the Navy would ever institute such a policy. Give it time though. We seem to be stepping closer to tobacco prohibition every year.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    38. Re:Cost analysis by gabriel · · Score: 1

      Of course it does have some resistance but it's still a pretty good conductor.

      You were never told not to stick pencils in power outlets?

    39. Re:Cost analysis by rifter · · Score: 1

      Although snopes says the story is not true, they go on to say it is true. I don't understand what criteria they used to determine this. The pen really did cost $1.5 Million to develop. Granted NASA did not pay $1.5 million, but the company that made the pen did. Both the US and the Russian astronauts used pencils, again according to snopes. So why do they say the story is false when their own quotations corroborate the story?

    40. Re:Cost analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there was no $400 hammer. The Navy used to use accounting rules that split up overhead costs equally per line-item -- so a bunch of whizbang doohickeys for testing jet engines, being one line-item, got about $400 over R&D overhead tacked on. The hammer used to open the crate, also being one line-item, also got about $400 of overhead tacked onto it. The $600 toilet seat and $1200 coffeemaker also aren't quite real (they were real, sort of, but for planes, where it makes economic sense to spend $1000 to shave half an ounce off the weight of something).

    41. Re:Cost analysis by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      Like all good myths (or lies if you want to be nasty), the story told does have some truth in it. The story told makes it sound as though US astronauts simply weren't writing in space until the invention of this pen. The story tries to make some sort of point that everything doesn't have to be all whizbang fancy, when clearly the facts contradict the "lesson" in the story. The pens turned out to be a great boon to both space programs because there were lots of problems with pencils.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    42. Re:Cost analysis by qtp · · Score: 1

      Did someone then point out that they could have made the ashtrays out of cast aluminum

      Actually the make the Navy ashtrays out of stamped sheet aluminum, in several different styles including some with cork sheeting attached to the bottoms to reduce slippage, which is important on the surface, and noise, which is important when under.

      But we all know how concerned the producers of our prime time entertainment are about accuracy.

      I don't think there I ever saw a glass ashtray on a submarine, but I only fixed them, and I spent as little time near the subs as possible.

      --
      Read, L
    43. Re:Cost analysis by invyrse · · Score: 1

      Um. First, submarines are equipped with equipment that extracts oxygen from water. This is what provides the air onboard a submarine. Do you honestly think that enough air could be carried onboard a submarine to allow it to be submerged for months at a time?

      Secondly, if you lived underwater for months at a time, you might decide to start smoking also....

      Third, If it were not permitted to smoke on a submarine, I'm sure that you wouldn't have smokers volunteering for sub duty. These guys are top-notch, whether they are smoking or not, over 50% of America's nuke arsenal is sitting on Ohio class submarines as part of the START II treaty, so I want the US Navy to be able to recruit and retain the best, regardless of their smoking preference.

      And the ashtray thing was metaphoric....its not like they really pay $400 for ashtrays. If they did, the people running these programs aren't TOTAL idiots. The US Government is notoriously cheap, I've contracted for them, and I know they don't pay a premium unless it's in their best interest.

      --
      -nlr
    44. Re:Cost analysis by guardian-ct · · Score: 1

      Easily... If MS software breaks, you get to keep all three pieces. The OS, the office software, and the web browser. Oh, wait, that's only two pieces now.

  5. Good News by dirtyhippie · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Before you all start griping, just remember... This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars that won't be spent on "smart" bombs. Although I am not for the us military in general, I am all about it wasting it's money. Each $ wasted could be a life saved.

    1. Re:Good News by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Also recall that this money "wasted" on MSFT fuels jobs at microsoft which in turn feeds American families.

      Biatch!

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:Good News by garcia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you're absolutely insane. If anything, these are to better help smart bombs attack people.

      Remember who is currently in office and what his goals seem to be.

      It's 1/2 a billion and that's not enough to curtail bombing.

    3. Re:Good News by KaizerWill · · Score: 1

      geez you are a dirty hippie...

      always remember, bombs can save more lives than they take. (but they have no moral obligation to)

    4. Re:Good News by inaeldi · · Score: 1

      1/2 billion, not trillian. Half a billion is a small amount compared the how much the US gov't spends on military

    5. Re:Good News by notque · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Before you all start griping, just remember... This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars that won't be spent on "smart" bombs. Although I am not for the us military in general, I am all about it wasting it's money. Each $ wasted could be a life saved.

      Was this a positive post for our government wasting money?

      What are you thinking man? Don't end your post here, elaborate.

      Why on earth can you concieve of this being a good thing? Because there will be fewer smart bombs purchased?

      This just in, If we want bombs, we buy bombs.

      We are in a republican controlled government. All that changes is the size of the debt.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    6. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the money will still be spent; it will just be pulled from some other source, like education or a tax increase on the poor.

    7. Re:Good News by dirtyhippie · · Score: 1

      Err, make that a half billion... :-)

    8. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but just think how many more Middle Eastern countries they'll have to "Liberate" before they have enough oil to pay for all of this?

      I mean, Iraq is already going to have its oil wells pumped for nearly a decade in order to pay for its reconstruction, this will be another two decades at least, even if Syria is "liberated" too!

    9. Re:Good News by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars that won't be spent on "smart" bombs.

      1/2 a billion dollars, right?

      Anyway, wouldn't you rather the military use expensive "smart" bombs than cheap "dumb" ones? It's not like a lack of funding is going to stop them from entering into conflicts in the first place.

    10. Re:Good News by Cleon · · Score: 0

      you're absolutely insane. If anything, these are to better help smart bombs attack people.

      Dude, it's *Microsoft*. There's no way in *hell* this will help the "smart bombs" do anything except get waaay dumber.

      --
      Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
    11. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars that won't be spent on "smart" bombs.
      It probably is being spent with the intention to create more 'smart bombs'. I think someone in the army got confused when seeing a reference to Microsoft's Blue Screen of Death (tm).

    12. Re:Good News by Lokist · · Score: 1

      Very good point... I think when it comes to the US military they need to have there cash depleted a little bit...

    13. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does Steve Balmer really need to buy another 0.5 trillion dollars worth of donuts? The guy looks like he's had enough already.

    14. Re:Good News by samhalliday · · Score: 1, Funny
      smart bombs? aren't those are the ones that arrive at your doorstep without you having to go collect them;

      *knock* *knock*

      "hello"

      "eh, i have a bomb delivery for" *checks notepad* "mr anderson"

      "yes, thats me"

      "sign here sir"

      *signs*

      "have a nice day!

      BANG

      aah, convenience in progress...
    15. Re:Good News by czfqnr · · Score: 1

      Umm...that's 1/2 billion..

      --
      Avg. Live Expectancy of a SysAdmin, 45 Years.
    16. Re:Good News by theFool · · Score: 1

      This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars that won't be spent on "smart" bombs

      1/2 of one trillion dollars is 500,000,000,000 (500 Billion). The article clearly says 471,000,000 which is 471 Million, not Billion!

      Even allowing for your 29 Million dollar round off (if you're going to ignore it, can I have it?), you are still wrong by 499.5 Billion dollars. Can you even fathom that number?

      Sheesh, learn some simple grade school math, or slow down and think before you post. Or maybe you meant Billion...

      --
      LINK : LNK6004: Sig not found or not built by the last incremental link; performing full link
    17. Re:Good News by jtshaw · · Score: 1

      Also remember that in the few wars we have been involved in recently MANY less lives have been lost then in the wars of the past.

      One of the reasons for this is things like smart bombs and surgical strikes all which require a lot of military technology.

      So while I certainly don't endorse war in any current situation I would rather us be able to hit a target with one small strike then 30 large scale strikes like it took back in the WWI and WWII days.

    18. Re:Good News by fobbman · · Score: 1

      Nice. Instead of "smart" bombs they get software bombs.

      Actually, that's almost a half-trillion dollars that was diverted from other worthwhile programs, such as education.

    19. Re:Good News by fobbman · · Score: 1

      Billion. I meant billion.

    20. Re:Good News by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I've never eaten a job. If you're doing it for the starving American families, why not just give them the food or money directly?

    21. Re:Good News by destine · · Score: 4, Insightful
      ...This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars that won't be spent on "smart" bombs. Although I am not for the us military in general, I am all about it wasting it's money. Each $ wasted could be a life saved.

      Personally I would rather see the money spent on smart bombs that minimalize civilian casualties. While I'm no lover of war, when it's necessary, I personally think killing less innocent people is good. So them spending huge amounts of money on insecure microsoft software seems like a terrible thing to me. Sure if we don't have any weapons we don't go to war, but we do need to defend ourselves. And that's half a billion dollars that isn't going into research giving real technical people jobs. Instead, it's going to Microsoft who will not hire new people because of this, but will most likely use half a billion dollars to destroy other smaller companies that get in it's way. So instead of creating jobs in research and development we are giving loads of money to a known abusive monopoly holder who will most likely use it to put good people out of work. I think the smart bombs have a smaller casualty rate personally.
    22. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting theory but Microsoft is a multinational, 1/3 of their workforce is outside the US, combine that with the fact that they have 80% profit margins, and that leaves $62M out of the original $471M that *may* make it's way to these so called jobs. After taxes that enough for a $1200 bonus or enough to cover health insurance premiums for about 4 months.

    23. Re:Good News by the_pooh_experience · · Score: 1

      Well I like your outlook, but that is almost 1/2 a billion (not trillion). You may be forgiven for this error, as computers most likely do your math for you. On the other hand, considering the US has $376B budgeted for military spending in 2003, this is less than 1/2 of one percent of the budget.

      On the other hand, with the cost of a smart bomb of about $20K, this comes to something like 23.55K smart bombs that the govt isn't spending. The US dropped over 30000 smart-bombs in the first 12 days of this recent war, meaning the purchase of MS computers may cause about 11 days of relative peace...

      ... or it may cause a more aggressive nuclear plan because the smart bombs are not around...

    24. Re:Good News by tconnors · · Score: 1

      go nuclear!
      then all we need is 1 bomb


      Nah. Set off many bombs, and then when the Ruskis release their "doomsday device", we can live in mine shafts, and have 10 women for every man. Mind you, we will have to get rid of monogomy, and we ought to select the women for sexuality, because to procreate and get the world back on track after the Cobalt Thorium G with a half life of 93 years has dissipated, we will need to breed lots and lots.

      Ah, sigh, Stanley Kubrick was a geneous.

    25. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dirtyhippie isn't an idiot, he just plays one on Slashdot. I suppose he'd rather us be wasting American lives than money on bombs.

      This article has it all for you nuts. You can bash Bush and M$ in one posting. I bet a lot of you just got off on that.

    26. Re:Good News by Eccles · · Score: 1

      Anyway, wouldn't you rather the military use expensive "smart" bombs than cheap "dumb" ones?

      Except that most expensive ones kept landing in Iran and Saudi Arabia until they stopped using them due to the protests. Why use them instead of the much cheaper JDAMs, which when they miss can't miss by that much? One might want to check how much Boeing contributed to various campaigns...

      (http://www.breakingnews.ie/2003/04/01/story9381 6. html)

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    27. Re:Good News by gamgee5273 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What, you think that the more MS makes the more people it needs? This isn't a car company, son! The same team is making Office whether or not it ships five copies or 5,000,000 copies. You don't need more people to create the software. And the duplicating and boxing is done by machines, so don't even think there are more jobs needed in that area.

      Go back to college and take Econ 101 again.

    28. Re:Good News by YE · · Score: 1

      You mean, each $ wasted is an American life endangered, right?

    29. Re:Good News by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      Tillian is a character in HHGTTG..."trillion" is a number. 1/2 of Trillian would be kinda messy...and morbid.

    30. Re:Good News by @madeus · · Score: 1

      Each $ wasted could be a life saved.

      Or alternatively...

      It's money that won't be avalible to help supply troops with (or reasearch) better armour and equipment (thus helping save the lives of American citizens).

      It's money that won't be avalible to put into reasearch in to building better, smarter, more accurate, long range conventional weaponry (meaning more 'dumb' conventional arms will be used instead, thus increasing collateral damange).

      It's money that the US government won't be spending on helping the poor, plowing into the healthcare system, or spending on education in the USA.

      Seriously though:

      The US Army has enough smart people and reasources to make a solution like Linux pay off, by having a standard customised-install-for them that's free, easily installable and easy to use (and it could be much easier to use given a customised distribution where all the options are hidden from users).

      The only compelling reason for them not to be switching to a free operating system is an existing dependancy on Windows only software they may already have.

    31. Re:Good News by oldmildog · · Score: 1

      $476,000,000 million is roughly 1/2 a billion, not trillion. Quite a difference. I'd raise an eyebrow if we were paying M$ that much money, although some companies have had market caps that high before.

      --
      They have the Internet on computers now?
    32. Re:Good News by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      It's also 1.11962890625 MB for .74D.

    33. Re:Good News by xchino · · Score: 1

      I think you may need to go back to elementary school and learn which digits hold what values, because this is only half a BILLION dollars. We spend over $400,000,000,000 (that's a billion) on our military each year. This is somewhat of a trifling sum to the military, who gets free money from our tax dollars. In other words, no, the military didn't just spend 400 Million on MS junk, the american ppl did.

      --
      Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
    34. Re:Good News by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      At least none of your beloved Iraqis got killed when they landed in Iran or Saudi Arabia.

    35. Re:Good News by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 1
      This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars that won't be spent on "smart" bombs.

      The parent has a good point. Why buy smart bombs that only target soldiers when we can just buy dumb ones and carpet bomb the whole area. Who cares about those school children or that nunnery. As long as its easier on johnny tax payer, right?

    36. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'll just outsource it to India.

    37. Re:Good News by CHatRPI · · Score: 0

      I think suicide bombers have prior art on that one...

    38. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least the "dirty hippie" can use proper grammar and punctuation.

    39. Re:Good News by mwjlewis · · Score: 0

      Wait what does wood (monogomy) have to do with women?? Joke... people.

      --
      www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
    40. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $471,000,000 = almost 1/2 trillion dollars?????

      With this fuzzy math, instead of making $6.00/hr flipping burgers, I'd actually be making $6,000/hr. What a great country.

    41. Re:Good News by The+AtomicPunk · · Score: 1

      First, I guess we shouldn't expect a hippie to be able to do MATH - that'd be 1/2 BILLION. :)

      Second, the US Military isn't wasting their money. They're wasting MY money, and the money of every other tax payer in this country.

      Third, to those who replied about how wonderful it is that the US Government is spending money to boost the economy - WTF? It's YOUR money. Wouldn't you rather KEEP more of your money so YOU can spend money and boost the economy?

    42. Re:Good News by SLaCk_KiD · · Score: 1

      yeah and since they are paying for the software with the cost of the initial computers and then spending additional funds on more MS stuff, paying double as was said, thats just more of our tax money going to no use at all....and the majority of the people who use those computers that are getting the software are trained to use it in the first place, so linux is an alternative, because they have to initially learn at some point, so they wouldn't be chanting "joo n00b l8m3r" they would be working like they usually do and there would be the admins who are there now that would have no reaponsibility change except to learn linux if tey dont already know it.

      --
      I said he'll flip ya, flip ya for real...
    43. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, Bush's goals seem to be defending America. Not rolling over and letting the USA take it in the ass for 8 years like Captain Blowjob did.

    44. Re:Good News by SylvesterTheCat · · Score: 1

      Jane, you ignorant slut.

      Most of the damage done to the country of Iraq was done long before the United States military and allies arrived on the scene.

    45. Re:Good News by bofkentucky · · Score: 1

      VALinux, RedHat, Yahoo....

      --
      09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
    46. Re:Good News by Eccles · · Score: 1

      Also recall that this money "wasted" on MSFT fuels jobs at microsoft which in turn feeds American families.

      For half a billion, the army could hire a whole bunch of programmers to write the equivalent software for them. And then we'd all get the benefit, and those programmers would feed their families.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    47. Re:Good News by trash+eighty · · Score: 1

      Why on earth can you concieve of this being a good thing? Because there will be fewer smart bombs purchased?

      its definately a good thing if those smart bombs are intended to be used on you!

    48. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would prefer that he go about his "defense" of America without impacting my paycheck (whether now or later).

    49. Re:Good News by mormop · · Score: 1

      Current estimates put Iraq's reserves of Oil as sufficient to cover the western market's demand for 4 years. With most major oil producing countries reserves entering or in terminal decline you may find the bill ain't gonna be paid off anyway.

      Maybe GWB is counting on a democrat being in office to take the rap when it all runs dry.

      --
      Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    50. Re:Good News by j3ffy · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the Army's agreement with Micro$oft limits what operating systems their weapons can use. If they can only buy weapons systems running M$'s os, then the problem of the Army purchasing smart bombs will be eliminated.

    51. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cuz as we all know, a grammatical error invalidates ANY argument.

    52. Re:Good News by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      yeah and since they are paying for the software with the cost of the initial computers and then spending additional funds on more MS stuff, paying double as was said, thats just more of our tax money going to no use at all...

      Would you care to provide proof of this? At the military base where I work, they did not get double copies of anything, in fact, they get price breaks on the machines (which do come preinstalled with operating systems only, but which are imaged with software and then branded with the *licenses* they're buying) which make them no more expensive than someone paying full dell price and getting a crapload of bundled software they paid for but will never use. I'd like to see some hard data on this 'paying double' thing. I know it *sounds* like something easy to make fun of the gov't about, but is it *true*?

    53. Re:Good News by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      It would be much more expensive to train people in Linux, in the short run, anyway. In the long run it would probably be a good thing for the country, as it would probably be enough to kill the country's dependence on Windows (half a million users is a good critical mass). But that's more of a political decision than a strictly economic one. Yes, it would benefit most people, but it would hurt others.

    54. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you dirty hippie!

      (wow i bet you've never heard that joke before)

    55. Re:Good News by jonfelder · · Score: 1
      Tillian is a character in HHGTTG...

      I don't know what a Tillian is..."Trillian" is a character in HHGTTG.

    56. Re:Good News by pmbuko · · Score: 1

      Since when is $471,000,000 (that's 471 million) almost 1/2 a trillion? Did you forget what comes after million? Count with me:

      hundred
      thousand
      million
      BILLION
      trillion

    57. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to re-examine how smart your smart bombs are, as they killed thousands of civilians in both Afghanistan and Iraq. If the US were not the #1 military power, your president and military leaders would be up on charges of crimes against humanity. And rightly so.

    58. Re:Good News by swordboy · · Score: 1

      This is almost 1/2 a trillion dollars

      No... it is almost half a billion. While it may sound like a lot, the government spends one billion dollars every *eight* minutes. So if they all leave four minutes early today, this will be a drop in the bucket.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    59. Re:Good News by fatcock84 · · Score: 1

      And I suppose that every minute of your company's time that you waste posting crap like this is good for my company's stock. You anti-America leftists crack me up.

    60. Re:Good News by destine · · Score: 1

      Saddam killed many more. Where is the public outcry against this evil? Oh wait, that's right. It's ok if he kills tens of thousands of his own people. They are his people after all.

      When will the world at large recognize that people like this are dangerous. We are not up for war crimes because we did what we had to do. You don't have to agree with that, but don't portray the US as some monster(at least not on this point) because civilians died. When there is war people die. This is why war is bad, mmkay? But sometimes evil people can cause even more damage. Hopefully stopped a lot of that and we can get the hell out and let the iraqis live in peace.

      If you want to talk about human rights violations, let's talk about Guatanomo Bay. Now there's a human rights story. Let's talk about how nobody in the United States feels safe anymore no matter how draconian the police or how far-reaching the laws are. Or let's talk about the fact that gay's and lesbians and transgendered people do not have the right to live, love, and marry. The fact that we ONLY killed thousands in a full scale offensive attack says a lot. If this man had killed your husband for speaking out, sent your children to the army at age 15, and left you with no rights to even take off 40 layers of clothing so that you could breath and you said, "Give the guy a break. He only wants what's best for us." Then you can talk about crimes against humanity.

      Get a clue, get some courage to come in under your real name and have an actual opinion, and then read some things like Human Rights Watch and find out what's really going on. The unexamined life is not worth living.

    61. Re:Good News by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      As if they're going to actually SHIP boxes to the U.S. Military. Most likely they'll get 100-250 installation CD's and a copy of the release notes wrapped in the EULA. Hence the 80% profit margins. :-) Long live Microsoft...

    62. Re:Good News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that was classic billy connelly; for you insensitive clods...

    63. Re:Good News by SLaCk_KiD · · Score: 1

      i never made fun of the government, just stated that it was following the normal way of doing things, paying too much for something, that thye could easily find a cheaper alternative too. and as far as proof...

      you said:

      "(which do come preinstalled with operating systems only, but which are imaged with software and then branded with the *licenses* they're buying)"

      unless i am completely out of my mind, if you took econ and ever heard of TINSTAFL, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Those licenses arent just given because microsoft feels that they make enough money that a few free licenses doesnt make a big deal. They are included in the price, you are still paying for it in the long run. and if they are given by dell or whoever the supplier is the same principal goes, they just up the price a little for the rest of the country, so all in all we are still paying for it....there is not "proof" needed, its simple econ and business...

      --
      I said he'll flip ya, flip ya for real...
    64. Re:Good News by inaeldi · · Score: 1

      Ironic how you make a typo while mocking my typo.

    65. Re:Good News by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      Ahhh...so you know Alanis Morrisette, do you? ;)

    66. Re:Good News by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      You said they were paying for the software *twice*, now you're saying we're paying for it *once*...which was my point...you're *supposed* to pay for things once.
      the military buys computers from dell at a discount, which have dell recovery cds and which have windows on them prinstalled, but not office or anything else. Then, the military buys licenses from microsoft for windows and office and images them onto the computers. now, if they were paying for everything twice, which they aren't, you could find "proof" of it and that's what I asked for. You made an assertion which you can not back up and now you're backpedaling. "proof" is needed before you make a statement.

    67. Re:Good News by SLaCk_KiD · · Score: 1

      now you're saying we're paying for it *once*zz its easy to say disprove, its hard to prove something, sorry i cant give you the hard data on that one, cause its probably pretty confidential stuff i am sure. but "they" is "us", we pay taxes, you kno wthat that is a basis for alot of government bugeting right? i mena you are in the millitary, where do you thin kthat they get the cash from?? they dont just print it when they need it. i think we both interpreted the article a little differently, and to each his own.

      --
      I said he'll flip ya, flip ya for real...
    68. Re:Good News by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      its easy to say disprove, its hard to prove something, sorry i cant give you the hard data on that one, cause its probably pretty confidential stuff i am sure

      Um..so confidential that they have an article that slashdot picked up about it...it's easy to say 'the gov't pays twice for stuff', it's hard to prove. They get a decent deal from microsoft, and yeah it's a lot of money, but it's also a lot of computers....$950 for software for 4 years isn't bad.
      I'm not in the military, i just work at an air force base. I agree that *some* money to run the gov't comes from taxes....but if you think that the only source of revenue the US government has is tax money...you're an idiot. No one's saying they get stuff free...I'm just saying that they're not paying for *this software* twice, like you said they were. when you say 'to each his own' are you referring to alternate realities?

    69. Re:Good News by SLaCk_KiD · · Score: 1

      yeha ok, and i think your a pompus asshole, so there is what i mean, and yeah they have a very indepth article there, gives so much information. Its an overview, jsut cause you read an article doesnt necessarily mean its true either. so i think your in an alternate reality. and once again you act like you saying no thats not true is a hard thing. what is it besides your own opinion that proves that i am wrong and you are right? nothing, your purely speculating that i am wrong and your right, wich in realtiy doesnt seem so. how about you prove to me that i am wrong, what proof do you have, i dont see any evidence besides your opinion in these posts, so dont come at me with something lie you have to prove this and that, you prove your point and then maybe ill take a look at what you have to say

      --
      I said he'll flip ya, flip ya for real...
    70. Re:Good News by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      OK, ignoring your obvious lack of proofreading, *you* posted that the government is spending twice for its software. *I* didn't come out with an assertion. *You* did. I said that in my experience (working on an Air Force base), your assertion was wrong. You're perfectly free to doubt my word, but doubting my word does not provide proof of your assertion. All I asked was that you back up an assertion that you made with proof. The fact that you think that makes me 'pompus' is a sign of your limited intelligence. I'm suuuuuure you know what the word means....even though you have no clue how to spell it. (yes, that was sarcasm, peabrain.)
      Tell you what, how about this: When I make a baseless assertion, rather than shooting yours down, I'll provide proof. However, since *you* were the one who came out with the 'government is spending twice' thing, *you* have the burden of proof. *I* didn't make your statement. If you can't back it up, shut the fuck up. Assuming, that is, that you know how, you unbelieveable moron. I'll make a deal with you, if you have the mental capacity to understand it: You back your assertion up with proof, then I'll provide my proof as to why you are wrong (or fail to). That way, we go in the logical order, and something might be accomplished. However, since there *is* no proof for your ridiculous assertion, I expect no more than the silly crap you've been posting, simply attacking me (in a very ineffectual way) instead of backing up what you originally said. If you don't want me to 'come at you lie you have to prove this and that' then don't go around spouting 'this and that' and I won't ask you to prove it.

    71. Re:Good News by SLaCk_KiD · · Score: 1

      ok i cant spell pompus correctly, and i do know what it means, so i will be the civilized one and not insult you, cause i dont need to come down to your level...you were in the air force so that means that you knjow everythign about how the government and the military work, sorry for doubting you. (that was sarcsam, peabrain).....and is you look at the original post you fucken idiot,
      The great things about this deal: the Army is going through a reseller, when clearly they have the purchasing power to buy direct; and most of the computers they purchase are normal consumer machines which will be purchased with Windows and Office already installed, so the Army will be paying twice for each machine.
      unless i am mistaken you must not have even read the first post, you jsut skipped it and read the article. i didnt come up with the idea of, i was following along someone elses opinion because i agree with it, so you can go fuck yourself, moron...maybe if you paid any attention to the post in the first place, or even read the article, which gives no facks at all, it was a basice PR for the deal you retard

      --
      I said he'll flip ya, flip ya for real...
    72. Re:Good News by untaken_name · · Score: 1

      Thank you for brightening my day! Your idiocy is refreshing, and your lack of comprehension is amusing. If you really *are* that stupid, my condolences. If, as I'd rather believe, you're looking to annoy people, I'm afraid that's failed. Your posts today have given me very much amusement.
      Now I'll let you get back to fucking your Uncle Dad.
      Have a nice day!

    73. Re:Good News by SLaCk_KiD · · Score: 1

      yeah same here, "fucking your Uncle Dad" thats a good one, wow i am speechless, actually i am not going to waste my time even trying to explain myself to someone like you...i dont know what idiocy your talking about, but since it amuses you i am happy for you. they say small things amuse small minds...

      --
      I said he'll flip ya, flip ya for real...
  6. Well, at least... by tijsvd · · Score: 1

    the world will be in safe. Didn't Microsoft commit itself to security?

  7. Blue screen of "death" by 56ksucks · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Does this price include working out the bugs and making everything work correctly? The last thing we need is the blue screen of death in the battle field. (fp)

    --

    ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

    1. Re:Blue screen of "death" by 56ksucks · · Score: 1

      I had one yesterday with Windows 2000, which I have to use at work.

      --

      ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

    2. Re:Blue screen of "death" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This could bring a whole new meaning to the word FUBAR.

    3. Re:Blue screen of "death" by bytes256 · · Score: 0

      I had one yesterday with Windows 2000, which I have to use at work. And I had XFree86 crash on me twice yesterday, what's your point? Sure it didn't bring down the whole OS, but I have had an XFree86 crash bring down the OS to the point where the only recourse was SSHing into it and rebooting it. I dislike Win2K for many reasons, but stability is not one of them, the old rumors of Windows instability stem from the 3.1x and 9x/Me days. The NT series (including 2k and XP) are damn stable. As stable as Linux assuming you have good drivers. Linux with bad drivers is unstable too, case in point, run XFree86 with a barely supported card, like the i830M video card.

      --

      Slashdot, the site where everything's made up and the points don't matter
    4. Re:Blue screen of "death" by 56ksucks · · Score: 1

      Actually I like Windows 2000 despite it's crashing. It impressed me with it's higher stability that previous versions of Windows the first time I installed it. I realize Linux crashes too. I'm actually not much of a Linux head. My point was that I hope they make an effort for the good of our troups to make sure they have good drivers and that everything is stable before they're caught out on the battle field with a blue screen error.

      --

      ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

  8. Gross Misuse of Tax Payer Funds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just goes to show how powerful lobbyists are. Well at least this levels the playing field a bit on the world military scale ... stop an M1 Abrams with KLEZ

    1. Re:Gross Misuse of Tax Payer Funds by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Just goes to show how powerful lobbyists are.

      I don't think lobbyists had to do too much work on this one. I think what it really shows is how powerful (near-)monopolies are.

  9. wasted tax dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't believe they would waste tax dollars like that. But, I guess if your budget is that big, and you will lose that money if you don't spend it, why not just buy lots of computers that will be obsolete in a couple years, instead of figuring out a better plan to upgrade the machines later with better parts.

  10. Oh great, we're are SO gonna win... by Marx_Mrvelous · · Score: 1

    The upcoming Cyberwarfare! At $950/machine, do you think each will come with IIS installed? Talk about ecurity!

    --

    Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
  11. Paying twice? by CrayzyJ · · Score: 5, Informative

    "so the Army will be paying twice for each machine"

    I RTFA and I saw NO reference to anyone paying twice. The article does not state this deal is for the OS and office, so you, Michael, should not assume anyone is paying twice.

    I know, I know. NO, I am not new here. Yes, I know /. is slanted. It still irritates me though.

    --
    Holy s-, it's Jesus!
    1. Re:Paying twice? by 73939133 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I RTFA and I saw NO reference to anyone paying twice. The article does not state this deal is for the OS and office, so you, Michael, should not assume anyone is paying twice.

      Can you come up with a reasonable collection of Microsoft software that costs $950 per machine (on average)? I can't.

      "Paying twice" seems like a pretty reasonable guess to me. That is, incidentally, also the situation in which many corporate customers are. Basically, the license you pay for with the machine doesn't quite cover enough.

      Of course, the Army may be able to negotiate with some big PC vendor not to include an OEM license, but that usually doesn't help either because the vendors usually also pay Microsoft for all shipping units, one way or another.

    2. Re:Paying twice? by Talez · · Score: 1

      My guess is that they're probably paying more for the support contract than the actual software.

      This reasoning would explain why the US Army is going through a reseller rather than using their "buying power" to buy direct through Microsoft.

    3. Re:Paying twice? by Talez · · Score: 1

      Can you come up with a reasonable collection of Microsoft software that costs $950 per machine (on average)? I can't

      I can. Office XP, Client Access Licenses for servers, support contracts would put the price well over $950/machine.

      Adding in the price for servers using Windows 2K3 enterprise/datacentre edition, exchange server and all the other software that may need to be licensed and I wouldn't be suprised if the US Army was getting a damn good buy.

    4. Re:Paying twice? by abe+ferlman · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know /. is slanted. It still irritates me though.

      Slashdot's not slanted- the world is crooked. Slashdot just looks slanted from your perspective. I imagine you believe Foxnews when they say they're fair and balanced too. Sheesh.

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    5. Re:Paying twice? by leifm · · Score: 1

      Isn't it something like OEM licenses are invalid for business use, so you have to buy a volume license or something? My work box came with XP, which was replaced with XP from our Select program, and didn't even use the product key on the box, used the volume license product key we have. So it seems at least where I work we paid twice(one pay as part of machine cost, once again for volume, and then there's that whole SA thing..)

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    6. Re:Paying twice? by nolife · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know /. is slanted.

      What makes you a third party? Are you participating from a different dimension where you are not really here?

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    7. Re:Paying twice? by CrayzyJ · · Score: 1

      "I imagine you believe Foxnews when they say they're fair and balanced too"

      NOOOOO. Foxnews is the worst, followed closely by the NY Post.

      I agree everyone is slanted to a degree, but the assumptions implied by the /. posters are sometimes _WAY_ out there.

      --
      Holy s-, it's Jesus!
    8. Re:Paying twice? by MikeLaw · · Score: 2, Informative

      According to various other articles on this subject (ZDNet, for instance), the deal includes both desktop and server software and unlimited upgrade privileges over the life of the deal. In addition, the Army believes that the deal will save from $50 - $100 million over what they were paying piecemeal.

    9. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      re: your sig, if you're driving at 80mph on back roads, high beams are REALLY useful. ;o)

    10. Re:Paying twice? by matthew.thompson · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually the standard licensing systems for Microsoft Office and Windows (Microsoft has a special name for this type of license but I can't remember it exactly - probably desktop platform) are about the only things they will license on that many machines.

      And the Microsoft subscription license requires you to purchase computers with Windows and Office AND subscribe to Windows and Office for that machine.

      If you end the subscription license you not only loose the upgrade options etc but you also forfeit the use of the original OEM license!

      For this reason we only purchase OEM copies of Windows and just leave them on the box it came with.

      --
      Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
    11. Re:Paying twice? by Eunuchswear · · Score: 5, Funny
      Yes, I know /. is slanted. It still irritates me though.
      Well, if it wasn't slanted it'd be |.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    12. Re:Paying twice? by mcp33p4n75 · · Score: 1

      You mean they aren't fair and balanced?

    13. Re:Paying twice? by Kombat · · Score: 1


      Actually, the "pipedot.org" is still available. I was pretty damn tempted to spend the $14.99 and register it, but I don't care *that* much about the joke. :)

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    14. Re:Paying twice? by vicious_sloth · · Score: 1

      hey! dont slam the NY post, what other newspaper can you pick up that can make a pun out of every headline?

      --
      Sun is Warm, Grass is Green
    15. Re:Paying twice? by mwjlewis · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And if you really think about it..... MS does pay taxes on it's income. so.... of the 471 MILLION, at least 30-40% of that is going to be going right back in to the governments hands, so.... you do the math.

      --
      www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
    16. Re:Paying twice? by sheldon · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Slashbot's "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" is right up there with FoxNews "Fair and Balanced" in terms of irony.

    17. Re:Paying twice? by Speare · · Score: 1

      Hm. Pipedot. Geek news without the slant. Has a certain ring to it.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    18. Re:Paying twice? by rtechie · · Score: 1

      Actually, through corporate chicanery Microsoft hasn't paid ANY income tax for years, and has wrangled discounts on all other taxes. So it's really only wantever money that filters down to the employees that will get taxed. For example, I suspect some sales guy is getting a bonus on this one.

    19. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Can you come up with a reasonable collection of
      > Microsoft software that costs $950 per machine (on
      > average)? I can't.

      XP + Office can easily cost that much. No, paying twice = an assumption.

    20. Re:Paying twice? by rtechie · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Clearly, /. is "News for Nerds." And I'd argue that many of the articles posted on /. DO matter to the "nerd community". The /. editors have never pretended that they didn't have biases, particularly anti-Microsoft and neo-libertarian biases.

      In my mind, this puts /. light years ahead of FOXNews which refuses to admit it's deep conservative bias. Their top commentator, Bill O'Reily has the nerve to call his show the "No Spin Zone".

      Don't get me wrong, I actually watch FOXNews. But it disturbs me that many people don't recognize or admit the slanted nature of the news they provide (and MSNBC as well), and that FOXNews encourages this.

    21. Re:Paying twice? by jdonnici · · Score: 1

      In addition to what the previous reply mentioned (client access licenses and server software), it's probably reasonable to think that the US Army has a need for things like Project, Visio, or even the occasional development tool.

      Priced an MSDN Universal subscription lately?

    22. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe if we had a right-wing version we could call it \. Or would that stink of Microsoft?

    23. Re:Paying twice? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > So it seems at least where I work we paid twice

      That's because you are S-T-U-P-I-D. If it came with XP on it, Why the hell did you reinstall the same OS from a different set of disks? Managing the product IDs? Most PCs have it right on the friggin case.

    24. Re:Paying twice? by leifm · · Score: 1

      Hey fuck you, it's not my decision. I think it's stupid too, but nobody gives a flying fuck what I think.

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    25. Re:Paying twice? by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Can you come up with a reasonable collection of Microsoft software that costs $950 per machine (on average)? I can't.

      Unlimited upgrades for the term of the deal? Support contracts? Microsoft SQL Server (a cool $5000-$15000 or so)?

    26. Re:Paying twice? by machine+of+god · · Score: 1
      Well, if it wasn't slanted it'd be |.

      Did anyone else read that as "straight dot"?

    27. Re:Paying twice? by jmauro · · Score: 1

      MSNBC as well

      As it has been said before, "To our knowledge, no one watches MSNBC". That's probably why no one ever noticed the bias on MSNBC before. No viewers.

    28. Re:Paying twice? by Hoch · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unslanted = |.
      Unslanted and balanced = .|.

      Neutrality is nothing but Gentalia.

      --
      2*31*37*263
    29. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes it really IS Pipedot. As in smoking the...

    30. Re:Paying twice? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > What makes you a third party

      Umm, not being a member of the first (well, largest) two parties?

    31. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reread the parents you are posting on. Listing Office XP is exactly what paying twice is about. Read.

    32. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The world is slanted, but not |.?

    33. Re:Paying twice? by Alsee · · Score: 1

      UN©ONSTITUTIONAL

      Yep, no slant there! LOL

      (Not that I dissagree with you).

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    34. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're thinking of Smokedot.

    35. Re:Paying twice? by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      Technically, if you italicize as you just did, it still does have a slant.

    36. Re:Paying twice? by HunterZ · · Score: 1

      Pipedot:
      Straight-up news for Nerds. Stuff that [i]actually[/i] matters.

      --
      Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
    37. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As in smoking the...

      Pole?

    38. Re:Paying twice? by Zeinfeld · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Don't get me wrong, I actually watch FOXNews. But it disturbs me that many people don't recognize or admit the slanted nature of the news they provide (and MSNBC as well), and that FOXNews encourages this.

      My parents came over and were somewhat surprised to find that I have FoxNews and the Christian channels blocked with the child filtering features of my satellite box. On the other hand none of the porn channels is blocked.

      I explained this by saying I don't let offensive content in the house. I find biggotry and lies to be offensive.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    39. Re:Paying twice? by Alsee · · Score: 1

      I think I'll steal that :)

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    40. Re:Paying twice? by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      Really?

      For a very large enterprise, I assumed that all the standard ingredients on a Windows desktop could be had for approximately US$ 250.00 /seat/year.

      Am I mistaken, or did MyCorp (about 10K seats) get a great deal, did the Army get shafted, or am I missing something altogether?

      Could others out there enlighten me?

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    41. Re:Paying twice? by Darkninja666 · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear. That's certainly the best use of the child filter.

      --
      Secure multi-mediation is the future of all webbing...
    42. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Pipe Dot" just doesn't have the same ring as our beloved "Slash Dot"

      =[

    43. Re:Paying twice? by mwjlewis · · Score: 1

      Do you have proof that they have not paid income taxes for years? I am not trolling, just looking for proof.

      --
      www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
    44. Re:Paying twice? by Quikah · · Score: 1

      The deal is for 6 years. About $159/seat/year. So your corp got shafted.

      --
      Q.
    45. Re:Paying twice? by JonKatzIsAnIdiot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That says more about you than the content that you're apparently afraid of.

    46. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't necessarily pay twice. That's not how enterprise license agreements work. Those people that negoatiated those contracts for your company did not get to be your boss by being idiots. The fact is they will get better support if the license number for your machine is under their enterprise agreement.

      Also, you probably got an approved image for your company, which is very important when supporting a company, especially a large distributed company.

    47. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have proof that they have not paid income taxes for years? I am not trolling, just looking for proof.

      Haha, come on man. This is Slashdot, whats the use looking for proof on Microsoft? You might as well say they train children as programmers in Mexico and make them work all day and night in sweatshops.

    48. Re:Paying twice? by rtechie · · Score: 1

      Well, here is the first article I could find using Google:

      "Microsoft enjoyed more than 51: billion in total tax breaks over the past five years. Microsoft, in fact, actually paid no taxes at all in 1999, despite $12.3 billion in reported U.S. profits. Microsoft's tax rate for the past two years was only 1.8 percent on $21.9 billion in pre-tax U.S. profits."

      http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporate_Welf ar e/Tax_Dollars_At_Work.html

      So I take it back, they paid no taxes in 1999 and very little in 2000 and 2001. I find it doubtful that Microsoft paid much more in 2002. I should also note that this is pretty typical for large corporations with political influence, the artice cited gives several other examples.

    49. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work in telecommunications for the USAF. We buy Dell desktops -- a lot of them. They all come with XP pre-installed. We wipe them off and put 2k on. We are paying twice.

    50. Re:Paying twice? by HopeUnknown · · Score: 1

      So would you say that politically, the /. crowd leans to the right?

    51. Re:Paying twice? by kylef · · Score: 1

      While this may be true for smaller organizations, MS has set up completely indpenent licensing schemes for the US Government.

      When I volunteered in the IT department of a VA Hospital, for instance, we had subscription licenses to all sorts of software specially marked "US Government Use Only: Do Not Copy or Distribute." Some of these media didn't even require activation keys on install.

      At the time I volunteered (early 2000), the VA Hospital Network was the 3rd largest installation of NT workstations in the entire world, behind the Department of Defense and Department of Justice (IIRC). Microsoft has custom agreements with its largest customers, agreements that don't fit under the umbrella of standard "Enterprise Subscription Licensing" or the other licensing schemes you find here.

      What I'm getting at is that you can't make ANY assumptions about the terms of the Army's license agreement (which the poster admitted we don't have details about), because they are custom tailored to each purchaser. The terms are often completely different from the standard "Enterprise" licenses that we are all familiar with in the business arena.

      If someone knows specifics about this particular license agreement with the Army, please speak up.

    52. Re:Paying twice? by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      no wonder we have children who have no sense of what's right because parents don't let them find out what is right but of course they let them find out what is wrong but don't say its wrong (porn)

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    53. Re:Paying twice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why didn't you just tell your parents that you liked porn?

    54. Re:Paying twice? by k4w0ru · · Score: 1

      Are you trolling?,.. I can't tell,... I guess that's what makes a good troll.... :)

    55. Re:Paying twice? by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      no wonder we have children who have no sense of what's right because parents don't let them find out what is right but of course they let them find out what is wrong but don't say its wrong (porn)

      Hang on, who said anything about stopping children watching anything. It's my parent's viewing that I am censoring, and that is because I don't like to sit and listen to TV channels that publish lies and bigottry.

      I see nothing wrong in porn, at least porn is truth of a kind. But Murdoch's hate TV on the other hand is evil.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    56. Re:Paying twice? by 73939133 · · Score: 1

      So? Everybody has to pay taxes. A $471m deal is still a $471m deal.

      And, in actual fact, Microsoft has been more successful than other companies in avoiding paying taxes, which is really pretty obscene for a company with one of the highest profit margins among the Fortune 500.

    57. Re:Paying twice? by mpe · · Score: 1

      That's because you are S-T-U-P-I-D. If it came with XP on it, Why the hell did you reinstall the same OS from a different set of disks?

      Probably because the OEM setup was useless for the environment the machine needed to be used in. With it being less work to install a pre-tweaked and configured image than to mess around with the OEM setup until it was usable. Outside of the Home and SOHO environments OEM preloads tend to be pointless.

    58. Re:Paying twice? by leifm · · Score: 1

      I am quite certain their is no blessed image, we have no stadards, it's a big mess.

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    59. Re:Paying twice? by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Outside of the Home and SOHO environments

      Can you define SOHO? I can't figure out what that means, except maybe "Single Operator...." something.

      Where I work we use the default W2K installations that come on our Dells and it works perfectly out of the box (well, except for SP updates & the like) with minimal software installs. Granted, we don't use a whole lot of software that needs to be installed...

    60. Re:Paying twice? by Fluid+Truth · · Score: 1

      Pipedot
      News for Potheads. Stuff that...uh...what were we talking about?

      --
      Apparently, of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
  12. Idiots by dh003i · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Thank you, whoever made that decision. Now, $450million of OUR taxpayer dollars are going to pay for a crappy defective OS with inherent security flaws, and we're going to be forced to upgrade on MS' schedule.

    MY tax dollars should not be spent on proprietary software.

    1. Re:Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With quality software from Redmond and outstanding support, who needs terrorists?

    2. Re:Idiots by pilybaby · · Score: 1

      That is true but when your millitary has a budget of $400bn it's not a lot, and besides it's proprietry software that runs in pretty much all your planes bombs and what not.

      A better way would be to half the millitary budget and install some kind of NHS system so that everyone could benifit from decent care when needed.

    3. Re:Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do NOT want the NHS, its a freaking JOKE!

      If you want REAL healthcare, get on a budget flight and go somewhere else in europe, hell even go to india, very affordable :D ANd hell, you get a BETTER service, the NHS is full of FAT CATs. Thats why its failed.

      I know all about it, I am on year waiting lists for a specalist, I know all about it, so much so that I use other countries healthcare. Shop around. Fuck the UKs failed system. (I am british btw)

    4. Re:Idiots by dspfreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmmm... cut the military budget in half to get a national health care system? That would be a trick, since we already spend more on medicaid and medicare than we spend on the military.

      --
      "Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." -- G. K. Chesterton
    5. Re:Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're on a waiting list? Why, me too! I suffer from a repeated spontaneous pnumeothorax (Collapsed lungs), to the point now where my left lung is permenantly damamged and I can't fly. I'll have to have thorasic surgery to correct the flaw and prevent it happening again.

      I have been refered to Cardif, which is not my local hospital as it happens. After about two months of waiting, I receieved a letter telling me I will recieve another letter in the future. Ah well.

      You know what though? I wouldn't give the NHS up for the world. In its current incarnation, it sucks. Thats mostly due to Thatcherism and some grining, lying twat who is apparently the Prime Minister at the moment. If they actually did what they promised and got rid of all these idiot managers, got rid of individual trusts, brought back matrons, put doctors and surgeons on exclusive contracts and raised nurses pay, it could actually work and be relativly efficient.

      Of course for that to happen, the grinning lying twats and the greasy smarmy idiots of this world will have to stop using it as a political football and actually show some real interest in doing something real about it. Fat chance I guess.

    6. Re:Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NHS, 80k a year and theyre not happy on average GPs pay? The main problem is They have a CONFLICT of interest, private work and state work, ONE OR THE OTHER or can work elsewhere.

      Fat cats, conflicts of interest and its just just failed.

      I don't have to pay for my healthcare as a RESIDENT in other EU countries (you can get a residency very easily, its europe).

      Look around. Use the system. You can always use boats.

      Rent an appartment in a place, get a resident permit (very easy if you are a European member state citizen). Thats what I do, it works, it works well, once you use theyre healthcare, you never look back.

    7. Re:Idiots by bytes256 · · Score: 0
      install some kind of NHS system

      We already have an NHS system, I got inducted into it in high school

      --

      Slashdot, the site where everything's made up and the points don't matter
    8. Re:Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I complained and was unhappy about the service I got, had to fight to pay to see a private consultant, they where going to remove me from theyre surgery as I complained. Strike me off the NHS, wtf. I have a RIGHT to healthcare as a TAX CONTRIBUTER. I can go to ANY hospital and see a doctor any time i freaking want. They cannot turn me away. Yet the GPs act like "we are god" mentality, and threaten to strike u off the surgery if you complain. WTF. FAILED sytsem. Until they fix it, use elsewhere.

      I get healthcare elsewhere in europe, I don't pay as a resident, or its a very small amount per GP visit or emergency. Capped rate. same rights as a citizen of that country in the europe zone.

      It will take YEARS of overhaul to fix the NHS, and still the FAT CATs are reaming the ass of tax payers.

    9. Re:Idiots by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      MY tax dollars should not be spent on proprietary software.

      Yes, they should. Or, rather, FS/OS/PS ethics shouldn't enter into the army's purchasing. This isn't a government office we're talking about--it's a military machine whose sole purpose is to express our national power.

      The military is historically very pragmatic. Ignoring the politics just for a bit (I think we both agree that politics should not enter into it, and that they probably do), the military should use, in all cases, what works most effectivly for the task at hand.

      Thus, just like our rationale for not using nuclear weapons is that they make a war unfightable, our rationale for using or not using windows is how much it makes the computer usable for those who will be using it. Remember that the Army, as skilled and strong as it is, is made up of a slightly down-skewed demographic with regards to intelligence and computer aptidude. It's important that these PCs be usable and maintainable by soldiers, without requiring full-time support.

    10. Re:Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A government should look after its people with good healthcare, those healthy people are able to contribute taxes, its in the governments (who claim to represent the people that voted for them for that representation) best interest. Preventative scanning rarely is available on the NHS. Most of the waiting lists are taken up by private work and private patients using the scanners in the NHS. Jumping the queue.

      To jump the queue, PAY to see a specalist very fast then you can get healthcare faster.

      The wait lists are just to see consultants, who are prefering private work over state. Thats where the wait is.

      Pay to see a consultant, to get up the queue.

    11. Re:Idiots by pilybaby · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      On the military in general, the USA spends more than the rest of the G7 countries combined

      To me this seems completly unjustifiable when you look at the state of health care in the US which relies on inequality and people affording their own care. How about more social security for the wost off or to move up from being 22nd on the list of industrialised nations giving foreign aid donations.

    12. Re:Idiots by pilybaby · · Score: 1

      Oh and just spotted this too:

      The total budget request for discretionary spending was $767 billion, of which 51.6% was the military budget -- $396 billion.

      The next two largest items, which were education and health, getting $52bn and $49bn dollars, (6.8% and 6.4% of discretionary budget) respectively.


      From here again.

    13. Re:Idiots by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Well, that'd be because the other G7 countries expect us to do the fighting for them.

      Bosnia, anyone? Kosovo?

      Hell, the US even has to help Europe move their military around. The US has 500 cargo (C-130 etc) aircraft for moving troops. Europe has 4.

      As for foreign aid donations, you probably didn't notice that the US is the largest donor on the list in 2002, with 12 billion dollars of aid.

      And I'll bet that list doesn't even take into account all the foreign debt the US doesn't collect on. (Hey, Europe - pay us back for WWII!)

    14. Re:Idiots by pilybaby · · Score: 1

      The interesting value isn't the ammount it's the % of GDP that is important here.

      And don't bring up irrelevent subjects like WWII it's just flaimbait.

    15. Re:Idiots by dspfreak · · Score: 1
      OK, but manadtory spending is at about $1.2 trillion, which includes social security, welfare, etc, including $445 billion for medicare and medicaid (combined). From the Congressional Budget Office.

      I think including only the discretionary part of the health budget (leaving out the much larger medicare and medicaid numbers), and also ignoring the fact that most education funding comes from the states (and should), skews the numbers a little. But I guess that's what politics is all about.

      But anyway, my initial point was not whether we're spending too much or too little on military, but that it's unrealistic to expect $200 billion to fix a $1.2 trillion problem that we're already throwing more than $400 billion at.

      --
      "Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." -- G. K. Chesterton
  13. As usual, Slashdot never fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can't really claim to know that they are paying twice for each machine. With a deal that large they are not going to be so naive with what they are buying. Government spending may be out of control but you cannot tell us that the military is doing something so stupid that you or I or any /. reader could figure out.

    In fact the military offers many tech positions and training opportunities and uses highly advanced technology on a day to day basis. The military in the US is one of the few large government institutions that embraces technology and its benefits.

    This is just clearly posted so that people can rip on MS and the large sum of money going to them. Typical /. *sigh*

    -Anonymoose

  14. Army by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Commander: We need to go into battle now!
    Officer: We first need to access our plans, but Word froze up with "reactivate your software now"
    Commander: Oh great. What can we do?
    Officer: Nothing. Congress passed a bill allowing copyright holders to seek injunctions against the army for violating the DMCA. We have to reactivate.
    Commander: But the enemy is jamming our cell phone signals!
    Officer: I guess we have to surrender.

  15. What software? by Surak · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the article:

    Charles Di Bona, software analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein, said in a research report that the contract would most likely add $16.6 million per quarter of "high-margin (in the range of 89 percent) revenues and add $0.001 per quarter to EPS."

    What products make M$ *that* much profit? Windows and Office of course.

    Let's see...if the Army is paying full retail (which I wouldn't doubt):


    Microsoft Windows XP Professional: $299
    Microsoft Office XP Professional: $449
    Microsoft Visio Standard: $199

    Total: $947


    There's most likely your answer.

    (Also, I happen to know that Visio Standard comes on the Army's standard build (a friend of mine worked for TACOM), so that's why picked it :)

    1. Re:What software? by NotClever · · Score: 1

      You can bet that this is like an Enterprise license agreement. Not only does it include Office and Windows XP Pro, but it will include CAL's to SQL Server, Systems Management Server, NT Server, and more, for the next 3 years.

      While you can argue about Microsoft vs. a 'free' solution, you won't get any traction with the government paying retail or more for this stuff.

      --
      Hell, there are no rules here. We're trying to accomplish something. - Thomas Edison
    2. Re:What software? by Surak · · Score: 1

      No doubt they got some CALs basically thrown in for free. But it's important to note that not all of the Army's machines have access to SQL Server or Systems Management Server. At least that was the case at TACOM.

      I'm not per se looking for traction from my post, I just happen to have inside info about the Army's network through friends at TACOM, which is basically a civilian army organization that buys stuff for the army and has a headquarters here in Warren, MI.

    3. Re:What software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The deal probably includes unlimited upgrades and unlimited iron-clad service.

      Maybe MS will go out in the field to reboot your tank:

      "Mooove! -- you SO can't start this tank until you take out the floppy disk! (moron)"

    4. Re:What software? by Cyclone66 · · Score: 1

      Except they most defiantly did not pay retail and you're forgetting the support that large organizations get when they buy software.

    5. Re:What software? by HBI · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wrong.

      They are site licensing the server products, almost the entire product line. Sharepoint, SQL Server, etc etc etc ad nauseaum.

      Exchange too.

      The details aren't being disclosed because MS doesn't want their other customers getting pissed at the ball breaking that the Army gave them.

      I happen to have met both the current and the next Army CIO. They are both _incredibly_ intelligent people. In particular LTG Cuviello (current) is pretty damn motivated and kicks some serious ass. These people are not going to sign a bad deal.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    6. Re:What software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Does that include Age of Empires?

      New and improved with Afghanistan and Iraq expansion packs.

    7. Re:What software? by NotClever · · Score: 1
      That's one of the problems / benefits of the enterprise license agreement. You get the server CALs for every machine whether you need them or not. The cost actually ends up lower to ignore the unneeded licenses than it is to buy the needed licenses separately.

      You are also required to pay for each computer whether or not it actually runs Windows. I hope they managed to get that out of the contract!

      --
      Hell, there are no rules here. We're trying to accomplish something. - Thomas Edison
    8. Re:What software? by Surak · · Score: 1

      Right. They *ALREADY HAVE* these site licenses. That's why I mentioned the specific client packages. They're probably site licensing the server products, but paying full retail for the packages to be installed on the client machines.

      Read my reply elsewhere in this thread.

      Why assume that I'm spouting falsehoods to make fun of the Army or Microsoft or to push the Open Source agenda? Oh, never mind this is slashdot. I get it. :)

    9. Re:What software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent deserves to be modded up for "informative"

    10. Re:What software? by HBI · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry if I made you feel bad. People usually rag on the Army here so...

      US Army did not (previously) have a site license for the entire organization. There may have been localized (for instance, the Pentagon) site licenses, but not for everywhere. This apparently gives the Army that. Previously, the Army was buying 2k Server/Adv Server/SQL/etc licenses individually + CALs which was expensive as hell and had no benefit for the bulk purchasing power of the Army.

      This deal gives them that.

      Admittedly the previous way of buying things was fairly stupid. This way is about the best that can be hoped for - the military isn't allowed to single-source anything which is probably why it went through a third party retailer who could handle the GSA contract details.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    11. Re:What software? by mkaltner · · Score: 1

      Looks like they already did, to me...

    12. Re:What software? by Surak · · Score: 1

      Ahhh...that's why TACOM may have had a site license, but other parts didn't. That makes much more sense now. The vagueness of the article didn't help. :)

      In that case, it sounds like the Army actually got a really good deal. Hopefully they got a nice support contract as part of that too.

      Unlike many people here, I don't believe that open source is *always* the answer. Sometimes you *gotta* run Microsoft (or whatever else) because it best meets your needs. Where I differ with Microsoft is that they seem to think that that you *always* gotta run Microsoft. But then again, that opinion is rather self-serving so it makes sense from their perspective. :)

      In cases where open source meets the need, I'll gladly evangelize open source. But it's crazy to think that any one solution will work in every given scenario. Sure, maybe they could use OpenOffice and Linux. But sometimes there aren't just technical barriers to running Linux (and there are, believe me), but there's also sometimes organizational and business need variables to consider. You can't really judge a particular decision unless you know every factor that went into making that decision. Common sense 101.

    13. Re:What software? by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      The details aren't being disclosed because MS doesn't want their other customers getting pissed at the ball breaking that the Army gave them

      hehehehhahahahha! $1/2 Billion dollars -- they sure talked 'em down alright!

      This deal is corporate welfare from the Republican US Gov.. the good news, this $500million is BORROWED MONEY THEYRE spendin'.

      hehehehehahaha.

    14. Re:What software? by jjshoe · · Score: 1

      While i havent had the experience HBI has, i must agree with the general idea that the public is kept in the dark with the real truth when it comes to the real details of contracts. for good reasons too. Im willing to bet that they went straight to bill and put the real squeeze on him. Bill probly didnt like this but realizing which way numbers have been shifting he relized he needed this number put out there to try and convince others to use his products.

      --
      -- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount} /dev/girl -t {wet;fsck;fsck;yes;yes;yes;umount} {/de
    15. Re:What software? by SphynxSR · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about all those trips they take to Redmond. If the next CIO is the one I am thinking of he used be my PEO(Very smart guy, knows this business very well). And he himself had taken many trips. Even after Mr.Balmer was at the Pentagon and failed to stop in and see him.

      --

      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
    16. Re:What software? by g0_p · · Score: 1

      They are both _incredibly_ intelligent people.

      And they went with Microsoft for software to be used in defence environments?

    17. Re:What software? by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      if the Army is paying full retail

      It sounds to me as if the U.S. Army could have got a lot better deal if they had bought their Microsoft software in Thailand.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    18. Re:What software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see...if the Army is paying full retail (which I wouldn't doubt):

      Microsoft Windows XP Professional: $299
      Microsoft Office XP Professional: $449
      Microsoft Visio Standard: $199

      Total: $947


      Shyeah! If the army is handing over millions of dollars to MS, like hell they would pay retail for every copy!

    19. Re:What software? by HBI · · Score: 1

      And they went with Microsoft for software to be used in defence environments?

      Do you think the US Army's desktops are much different than any other corporate environment? They aren't. They use the de facto standard, which is MS (Windows/Office).

      It isn't so much them going to Microsoft as accepting the de facto standard, and acting to stop the hemmohraging of money going Redmond's way by structuring the bill.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    20. Re:What software? by swillden · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do you think the US Army's desktops are much different than any other corporate environment? They aren't. They use the de facto standard, which is MS (Windows/Office).

      Don't try to give *me* that crap. I've been to the movies and I know the government has *much* cooler stuff, with all kinds of fancy animation and *huge* fonts and awesome sound effects.

      Microsoft Windows... yeah, right!

      What a loser.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    21. Re:What software? by Rohan427 · · Score: 1

      These people are not going to sign a bad deal.

      They already have - they chose M$ for their solution. Apparently a high level of intelligence had nothing to due with the decision.

      It's comforting to know that our national defense is left in the hands of such outstanding technological expertise as that provided by M$ through their wonderful products.

      PGA

    22. Re:What software? by kir · · Score: 1

      ". . . the military isn't allowed to single-source anything. . ."

      That's not true. The military CAN do single-source purchases, they just have to justify it. My clients do it all the time.

      --
      3cx.org - A truly bad website.
    23. Re:What software? by Cally · · Score: 1

      >These people are not going to sign a bad deal.
      >

      And yet they're spending money on Microsoft software, so it seems you must be mistaken.

      --
      "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
    24. Re:What software? by mpe · · Score: 1

      In cases where open source meets the need, I'll gladly evangelize open source. But it's crazy to think that any one solution will work in every given scenario.

      Someone should tell Microsoft this, since they apparently believe that their stuff is the solution to every single senario... Including applications where Windows major selling point, the GUI desktop, is either irrelevent or unwanted baggage.

    25. Re:What software? by Surak · · Score: 1

      Someone should tell Microsoft this, since they apparently believe that their stuff is the solution to every single senario..

      Um, I said that. :)

    26. Re:What software? by HBI · · Score: 1

      Ok ok you're right but we're trying not to confuse the unwashed masses here!

      In general, we aren't allowed to do it.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  16. Be all You can be by conteXXt · · Score: 1

    has new meaning. one word stupid

    --
    The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
  17. Validation by a questionable source. by beaverfever · · Score: 1

    Keith Hodson, a Microsoft spokesman, said the contract could help the Army reduce its costs and "validates the Army's belief in our security model."

    It's also commonly known that the US Army (the US Military in General) isn't well known for spending its money wisely.

  18. Of course by harm5way · · Score: 1

    This is the new version of $600 toliet seats..

  19. not a big suprise by iceT · · Score: 0, Redundant

    from the same organization that brought us $100 toilet seats and $500 hammers.

    --
    -- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
    1. Re:not a big suprise by jratcliffe · · Score: 5, Informative

      Lay off the toilet seats. They weren't that expensive, it's an overhead (read cost accounting) issue. Imagine a project, Weapon X, with $1BN in R&D expense required to design the weapon, but where actually producing the full run of Weapon X only costs $100MM (not an unusual situation in military procurement). Then imagine that, as part of that $100MM, there's a wrench needed to tighten the bolts on Weapon X. Since only 10 of these wrenches will ever be produced (they're oddly shaped to fit into the chassis of Weapon X, and the bolt is a strange size), so the cost of the mold and casting is $500 - it's a $50 wrench - pricy, but not ridiculous. For the project as a whole, though, remember you have to allocate that $1BN in R&D cost. From a cost accounting point of view, every dollar spent on the wrench gets $10 in R&D allocation. Voila, a $550 wrench.

    2. Re:not a big suprise by chundo · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think the R&D has pretty much been covered for toilet seats by now.

      -j

    3. Re:not a big suprise by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      You didn't even read everything he wrote there, did you? The aggregate cost of R&D for the entire system is spread over it's components.

    4. Re:not a big suprise by chef_raekwon · · Score: 1

      this sounds like a crock of shit (yes, im sure that sounds very "trollish"). the mold and casting I can understand, but, when it comes down to simple things like screwdrivers/normal wrenches/anything i have in my basement/etc and prices are sky high...i start to wonder.

      maybe, just maybe, the American people are witnessing one of the largest coverups in the history of mankind -- all the Army has to do is- buy a 4 dollar wrench, have the company invoice them for 400, now i have 396 to put in my bank account.....or even better, collectively put the money into an account, and build army protection bunkers miles beneath the earth when they start WW3.. damn..either i just ate some hash, or i'd be pretty good with the conspiracy theories....

      --
      We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
    5. Re:not a big suprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For your enlightenment, the prices quoted on various "ordinary" items like hammers and toilet seats were just an accounting ploy so that the real dollars could go to supporting black projects.

      How do you think secret weapons get funded? Out in the open in Congress? For God's sake, man, use a little logic!

      If you're no smarter than that, how the hell did you find slashdot to begin with?

    6. Re:not a big suprise by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      Actually, it was even worse than I remembered - the cost allocation wasn't done on a $ basis, but rather on a line item basis. In other words, $1BN in R&D, 1000 line items being procured, $1MM in cost assigned to each line item, whether they're a customized board for a supercomputer, or the handiwipes used to clean the case. For more, check out this.

  20. This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Meat+Blaster · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The Navy already uses Windows almost exclusively for its day-to-day computing, and it seems to be working out alright. Admittedly, it isn't cheaper out of the box, but I could see the total cost of ownership easily being lower given that they can procure much of what they need rather than depending on somebody in house to design it.

    They aren't a business. They can't afford to code up every little thing when they need it and they need to know that they can depend on somebody else to fix any problems that might come up. It's a variant of the "Who do you sue" problem. Microsoft's stuff is easily usable and ultimately gets the job done, which lets them focus on what's important.

    I'd hate to think that our fighting forces are futzing around for weeks on end trying to figure out how to get fonts to anti-alias, let alone getting the whole "enterprise" to work. Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP Professional streamline enterprise activities.

    1. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by kk5wa · · Score: 5, Informative

      AFAIK, WinXP has not been approved for use on any DoD network. There are a few stand-alone systems out there, but XP on a network is a big no-no.

      --
      sine puella vita suget
    2. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "They aren't a business. They can't afford to code up every little thing when they need it and they need to know that they can depend on somebody else to fix any problems that might come up."

      The armed forces can afford to code up something? Can't afford? Are you joking?

    3. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by FeloniousPunk · · Score: 1

      The Navy already uses Windows almost exclusively for its day-to-day computing, and it seems to be working out alright.
      Thanks for pointing that out - in fact, pretty much all the services do, and it's nothing new. Back in 1993 and 1994 we were using MS-DOS and Windows 3.1, and Word/Excel. The only difference then was that we were using Harvard Graphics for presentation software instead of Powerpoint.

      --
      I know this because Tyler knows this.
    4. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These things take time. No doubt XP will be approved in a year or two.

    5. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm.. I wonder how I could set up a business writing software that the US Navy/Army/whatever will use...

      1. Set up software company writing military software
      2. Insert backdoor in said software
      3. Watch as US <see above> buys software
      4. Activate backdoor
      5. ?
      6. World Domination Is Achieved!!!

    6. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't that I would like to see the Army laboring to use free software, but how considering how much damage one simple worm did to M$ based networks, do you really want the defenders of our country relying on that OS? Seems to me you could shutdown the network with a carefully worded email... scary.

    7. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Mac+Degger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "They aren't a business. They can't afford to code up every little thing when they need it and they need to know that they can depend on somebody else to fix any problems that might come up."

      'scuse me, but a company that makes it's own multi-million dollar AAA computer game /for recruiting purposes/ AND gives it away /should/ be coding their own stuff.

      Not only that, but the armed forces /are/ a business. They work with budgets, have an IT department, hell, they even have an electronic warfare department which handles computer attacks too.
      Furthermore, when you use these systems to deploy nukes and other highly damaging weapons, do you want a stable system or do you rely on windows?

      And before you ask, yes, I'm running winXP, because it costs shit for me via the university and it's stable enough for me. It would be a different situation if I where directing lethal ordinance...but I'm not.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    8. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "The Navy already uses Windows almost exclusively for its day-to-day computing, and it seems to be working out alright." Have you read about the $7 Billion NMCI project?

    9. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Cyclone66 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A computer game isn't as difficult to make as military spec software. If the game crashes or has backdoors or exploits, PEOPLE DON'T DIE.

    10. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by faust2097 · · Score: 4, Informative
      The armed forces can afford to code up something? Can't afford? Are you joking?
      The armed forces [especially the Army] are very hard up for geeks right now, I've been talking to a couple recruiters over the last few weeks and they've all been extremely excited to speak with someone who has a college degree and good computer skills.

      Given that they don't have enough people to fill the existing technical positions that they have open, how could they possibly expect to take on something like an OS switch without spending a lot more than half a billion dollars? They'd have to hire an outside contractor to help implement it. At least by buying Office they can havfe their existing techs support it.

    11. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Tim+Macinta · · Score: 5, Insightful
      They aren't a business. They can't afford to code up every little thing when they need it and they need to know that they can depend on somebody else to fix any problems that might come up.
      Wait a minute... they just agreed to purchase half a billion dollars worth of software and you're saying they can't afford to hire people to oversee the customization and support they might need with something like Linux? For probably a lot less than half a billion dollars they could hire Linus himself and probably have more than enough left over to hire Alan Cox, RMS, and pretty much whomever else they please.
      It's a variant of the "Who do you sue" problem. Microsoft's stuff is easily usable and ultimately gets the job done, which lets them focus on what's important.
      If you have your own IT department custom rolling Linux distributions for you, you are going to get things that just work and are easy to use. The iRobots that debuted in Afghanistan ran Linux and I don't think anybody complained about needing to anti-alias fonts or that they were too hard to use. In fact, the soldiers had a very easy time learning to use them and found them to be invaluable. The point is, the military has successfully used Linux, they did get excellent support from a vendor, and they certainly didn't pay half a billion dollars for it.
    12. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      The armed forces are not a corporation... yet.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    13. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Furthermore, when you use these systems to deploy nukes and other highly damaging weapons, do you want a stable system or do you rely on windows?
      Personally, I don't care, as long as you get rid of the subroutine that automatically fires on British aircraft.
    14. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by ratboy666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      $471,000,000 is not "futzing around for weeks". That kind of money buys a major development effort. Or, makes Microsoft very rich. Really, if anti-aliased fonts are important, you can sure get them for a lot less than that! Pretty much whatever you want, actually. What is amazing is that free software has come so far in so little time. Of course some pieces have "corporate sponsorship" or have been donated (OpenOffice.org comes to mind).

      What I find sad about this story is that a small injection of funding into the open source pool could have given comparable results, with the additional benefit that everyone would have an improved system to base on. The injection may have been as little as 10,000,000 US but it sure would have helped.

      In a sense you are right -- MS offers seamless (at the UI level) integration, and they make damn sure that the GUI functions work (other stuff may be badly broken, but the "user experience" rules). Because these are among the LEAST important aspects of computing for most people who contribute to open software (my list has functionality, stability first; if you want it pretty, pay me, because I can live with text interfaces), it would take an external influence to improve these factors. And a cash payout would have worked.

      What level of "enterprise" does Microsoft do well? A hint: they don't. It really is UI flash. MS operating systems don't support major transaction processing systems; they don't support major on-line bidding sites or email. We don't know if they scale well.

      It's a sad story; let me call my broker and buy some more MS.

      Ratboy.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    15. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Luckboy · · Score: 1

      Actually, I work as a sysadmin for the Navy, and in my department, we use mainly Mac OS X and Yellow Dog Linux. There are only two Windows machines in the office that are shared by everyone, yet not many people use them.

      This is probably why I have time to post messages on /.

    16. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by FeloniousPunk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Furthermore, when you use these systems to deploy nukes and other highly damaging weapons, do you want a stable system or do you rely on windows?
      Man, the ignorance of /. never ceases to amaze me. Now hear this: the US military DOES NOT USE MS WINDOWS BOXEN TO CONTROL NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Or, any sort of weapon for that matter. The military, like most large institutions, has a need for office automation apps, e-mail, and the like. And for this, they use Windows and Office. Warfighting software on warfighting networks is proprietary and doesn't run on Wintel machines.
      Trust me, Mr. Random Slashdot Microsoft Basher, the military is smarter than you when it comes to figuring out its software needs and how to use computers in warfighting. Please adjust your facile and wrongheaded criticisms accordingly.

      --
      I know this because Tyler knows this.
    17. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and when winXX crashes PEOPLE DONT DIE ?

    18. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by utmecheng · · Score: 1

      theres a serious movement to make any software on custom hardware to be opensource. The pcs that soldiers check their email with might run windows, but a lot of equipment runs embedded linux or custom built os's. The idea is that you dont want a soldier fumbling around restarting a piece of equipment because of a blue screen.

    19. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      All software needs "futzing around" to get to work their best. My concern is that will these systems be well maintained? Will they get the security updates *installed* on all machines before we get another incident like the SQL worm? I know all server systems have their problems, and all need their updates, but Microsoft systems are the easiest target because of how comon they are.

    20. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      "I've been talking to a couple recruiters over the last few weeks and they've all been extremely excited to speak with someone who has a college degree and good computer skills"

      They are just blowing smoke up your ass to get you to join. GED's only thing that's required as far as education level goes. Only benefit you would get off of a college degree is that you get to go in as a Specialist instead of a Buck Private.

      "At least by buying Office they can havfe their existing techs support it." If their existing techs can't support Open Office, it's time for them to get a new tech.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    21. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      The Navy already uses Windows almost exclusively for its day-to-day computing, and it seems to be working out alright.

      Really?

    22. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by p3d0 · · Score: 1
      Dude, this is HTML. You don't need the /slashy/ italics. You can use real italics.

      It's time to enter the '90s.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    23. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Tyreth · · Score: 1

      I'm sure a great deal of Americans will be outraged at this waste of money, for reasons you post and for others.

      But for many of the rest of the world who fear attacks by the US (founded or unfounded), I'm sure they'll be happy to hear the military blew $471million when they could have spent a lot less.

      Seems irrelevant to me really, not being a US citizen. If America continues it's obsession with Microsoft, then we'll just move on without them. Not that I feel bad towards our American counterparts. I can understand your angst over decisions like these.

    24. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rant mode:
      The DoD community are mostly desktop users of non-critical apps, and since there is not TIME or REASON to convert users who are COMFORTABLE doing WORK with M$FT products because those are the de-facto standard, the contract is not a "win", just inevitable.
      Linux is fine for my personal desktop, and fine for servers or other apps where end-lusers are kept away from it. However, because it is different from Windows it is not a suitable replacement for Windows on workers desktops.
      We have wars to fight, training, and peacetime missions to accomplish. Most .mil users are self-trained, and that standard between home and office is Windows. Retrain and support of those users, and correcting their mistakes while they learn, would be more pain than a mere half-billion bucks to Bill Gates.

    25. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      I think if they were going to replace windows with something opensource, they would use OpenBSD. Something a little more secure than linux. Who wants their tank root-kit'ed

    26. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent needs to be modded up for "informative" or "insightful"

    27. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by artemis67 · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute... they just agreed to purchase half a billion dollars worth of software and you're saying they can't afford to hire people to oversee the customization and support they might need with something like Linux?

      It's not so much of a question of money as it is a question of time and transition.

      The military does most of their own training; do we have any active duty people working in an IT billet here who can comment on the state of military training with regards to Linux?

      I would venture a guess and say that 90% of military IT training is Windows-based, and has been for a long, long time. For the military to start rolling out Linux would require more schools, more training, and lots of time to transition. The military probably already does have millions and millions invested in proprietary development, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they still have a significant number of machines running MS-DOS.

      Admittedly, it makes NO SENSE for the military to spend half a billion on closed source when adequate, even superior open source alternatives are available. But somebody has to get the cattle prod out and start poking them in the ass. There needs to be some high-profile advocates both inside and outside the military pushing this.

    28. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by awol · · Score: 1

      Au contraire. This encapsulates eveything about why the gubmint should view software as a public good and spend, oh i don't know, 10% of that figure to make _every single piece of free software they want _perfect_ for the task, and thus perfect for the _entire_ country. That kind of investment makes perfect sense. Indeed on any basis I would argue that the decision as puiblicised is verging on the criminal misuse of money.

      --
      "The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."
    29. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by 1010011010 · · Score: 1


      Boy, that sounded like a press release for Microsoft. "Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP Professional streamline enterprise activities." -- sheesh! I think this would be the opposite of the truth, as in general Linux desktops can do everything that Windows desktops can, for business needs. Linux doesn't run the $9 business card maker software, or the latest video games, but the Army doesn't need that stuff, and shouldn't be letting its people install random Best Buy software on Miltary computers in any case.

      "futzing around for weeks on end trying to figure out how to get fonts to anti-alias" ... what?!?

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    30. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by 1010011010 · · Score: 1


      Mmm. Yes. And Windows doesn't have any backdoors or exploits. Couldn't possibly. I'm sure the Amry reviewed the code.

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    31. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by 1010011010 · · Score: 3, Insightful


      Why does the Army need MS Office? The U.S. government went to a lot of trouble to define and adopt standards like SGML and POSIX -- only now to get locked into proprietary solutions from a criminal software house?

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    32. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by thelexx · · Score: 1

      You really think using MS software implies an absence of backdoors and exploits? Considering their track record, people are practically guaranteed to die now. Also, in their EULAs, MS specifically disclaims liability for any problems that arise if you are stupid enough to use their software on life-critical systems. If you want a bulletproof, milspec, whatever you want to call it system, MS is the LAST place to look.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    33. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by buysse · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Actually, in a twisted way (that fits well with Reaganomics), it does make sense for the govt to buy expensive, closed-source software. They are stimulating the economy by government spending.

      Disclaimer: I don't agree with this decision either, but that may well be a political reason. Open Source doesn't put more money in to the economy, sadly. More expensive might be good.

      --
      -30-
    34. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aha! Blabbing the plan, classic villain mistake! The FBI are on their way, Mr. Gates.

    35. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      Wait a minute... they just agreed to purchase half a billion dollars worth of software and you're saying they can't afford to hire people to oversee the customization and support they might need with something like Linux? For probably a lot less than half a billion dollars they could hire Linus himself and probably have more than enough left over to hire Alan Cox, RMS, and pretty much whomever else they please.

      You've obviously never worked on a military contracted project. They can't just go out and "hire Linus himself", or even say who they want to hire. They have to get all kinds of competitive bids and make sure the bidding companies have jumped through all the right hoops to be eligible. And no, they can't just form their own little software development house, either. The army tries to contract out for everything that doesn't directly support its job: land warfare. Mess hall cooks are mostly civilian now, even.

      If you have your own IT department custom rolling Linux distributions for you, you are going to get things that just work and are easy to use.

      Yeah? How long will it take to debug it? How long will it take to get this custom-made Linux certified for DoD use? What is your definition of "easy to use"? Easiest of all to use is the most annoyingly ubiquitous commercial OS and Office apps, which most people already know how to use before they join. Who's gonna teach thoswe dopes in the finance corps how to use this custom OS? Who do they call when something doesn't work? Linus himself? Will the army really want to pay for its own in-house OS tech support? Where will they find enough people to man the phones who know how this particular custom-built version of Linux works?

      The iRobots that debuted in Afghanistan ran Linux and I don't think anybody complained about needing to anti-alias fonts or that they were too hard to use. In fact, the soldiers had a very easy time learning to use them and found them to be invaluable.

      Bad comparison, man. iRobot's use of Linux is an embedded application. The army uses a non-windows based operating system for the Stinger-RMP SAM. Who cares? It's embedded. It not relevant.

      The point is, the military has successfully used Linux, they did get excellent support from a vendor, and they certainly didn't pay half a billion dollars for it.

      We're talking desktop computers, not limited-purpose field deployed systems. They're getting support for the iRobot-builtn PackBot, not Linux. The fact that the PackBot runs a customized Linux is totally irrelevant. They also didn't order a PackBot for every desktop computer, so saying it didn't cost .5 billion dollars is irrelevant as well.

      I'd like to see the military move towards non-microsoft software, sure. But saying "for half a billion they coulda' rolled their own" is an uninformed handwave at the realities of getting anything deployed in the military.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    36. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by tidge · · Score: 1

      Do you really think they will be using windows to deploy nukes and other ordinance? I think not.

    37. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by jafuser · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure a great deal of Americans will be outraged at this waste of money

      Hardly. Most (read 95% of) Americans don't get "outraged", unless the second daily showing of Friends gets pre-empted or the local Starbucks changes the brand of creamer they use.

      Apathy doesn't even begin to describe the scale of blind contentment here in the US...

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    38. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by secret_squirrel_99 · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, when you use these systems to deploy nukes and other highly damaging weapons, do you want a stable system or do you rely on windows?


      You're joking right? I can't believe you'd be naive enough to think that the military is using off the shelf software or operating systems for anything as mission critical as nukes or targeting systems.

      This is desktop software used on desktop computers. The army like any other business, more so in fact than most, has a huge number of users whose only computer needs are email, a word processor, a spreadsheet, and access to a corporate database, and like it or not, the Microsoft products are the best available solution.

      --
      If privacy had a tombstone it would read "We did it for your own good" . -- John Twelve Hawks
    39. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by faust2097 · · Score: 1

      Until OpenOffice is 100% file compatible with current versions of Office and it works exactly the same that's a moot point. Retraining the hundreds of thousands of people who use it, a fair number of whom are currently deployed is impractical. Every single product the military uses needs to be 100% documented and training programs need to be developed for both users and the support staff. That stuff isn't cheap. I'm not jumping for joy at this contract it's just that the usual slashdot 'should've used Linux' argument is irrelevant.

      I know that a GED is all that's required to enlist but if you have a college degree you can join as an E3 [AF & Navy] or E4 [Army], you can get a guaranteed MOS/job or you can apply directly to officer training. I'm not really the military type but repeated layoffs and 2 years of freelancing makes 4 years of guaranteed employment pretty darn attractive. Plus I'd rather wear a full uniform than have to go 'business casual'. Khakis are the yoke of yuppie oppression!

    40. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Bill gates owns 10% of the company that makes aircraft carriers. you thnk there is a conflict of interest? naw...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    41. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Dak+RIT · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The armed forces [especially the Army] are very hard up for geeks right now, I've been talking to a couple recruiters over the last few weeks and they've all been extremely excited to speak with someone who has a college degree and good computer skills.

      This is unfortunately extremely true. I'm in the Army myself, and I usually don't even bother to talk to anyone from our Automations department (who actually receive about 24 weeks training in Windows, Solaris, and UNIX... although almost exclusively Windows). We have 18 people in our Automations department, 3 of which have ever *heard* of Linux, 1 of which has heard of Linux because I showed it to them, and the other 2 who actually use it at home. The other 15 I think would go braindead before I even got to a command line (and remember, they've supposedly had training on UNIX).

      That's the state most Brigades in the Army are in right now. We're actually lucky to have 2 people who know what Linux is. Those 2 people actually get 95% of the work done as well, the other 16 sit around and unlock accounts for people when they enter their password wrong 4 times and make bad patch cable (they've never made one right for me yet... I stole some crimpers from them a while ago and just make my own now if I need some).

      The sterotype that the US Government has all the coolest stuff is really way off. We may have the coolest stuff that goes "BOOM", but we also have a monopoly on the technology. When it comes to computer technology we are in many ways still in the 1970s, and continuing to fall behind.

      Dak

    42. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      That being the Navy / Marine Corps Intranet project, I assume?

      I can't find anything on major problems due to Microsoft Windows malfunctioning - care to enlighten?

    43. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by cygnusx · · Score: 1

      For probably a lot less than half a billion dollars they could hire Linus himself and probably have more than enough left over to hire Alan Cox, RMS, and pretty much whomever else they please.

      Yeah, hire a Finn, a Brit, a Brazilian, assorted Germans... all prima donna type kernel geeks who are totally unpredictable. Next the Army will set up PARC II to give these geeks a playground to play in.

      By your argument, Ford ought to produce its own tyres. and Unilever and Walmart its own trucks. That's called "Vertical Integration" and it's dead as a concept. Today organizations stay lean and mean by specializing at *one* particular job and being the best at it. Note the corollary of this is that some organizations will get VERY good at what they do, and it will make more sense for other organizations to go to them rather than the second-in-market, even if second-in-market is very good indeed. And yes, post win2k, MS as a desktop has gotten very good indeed -- and light years ahead of the sewn-together OS that is Red Hat 8.

    44. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by conway · · Score: 1
      Wait, are you saying Microsoft products are military spec???

      You've got to be kidding me!!!

    45. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by pmz · · Score: 1

      Why does the Army need MS Office?

      It is because Bill Gates, a salesman, is much smarter than the U.S. Government. A good salesman always distracts the customer from logical alternatives.

      Remember the cartoon about a salesperson selling refrigerators to Eskimos? Well, there you go.

    46. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      " Until OpenOffice is 100% file compatible with current versions of Office and it works exactly the same that's a moot point. "

      The Goverment, and I mean ALL of the goverment, needs to be moved from any propritary format, to open formats. That way the can get fair bidding, compition, longevity, and cost savings. If MS, RedHat, and SUN all are on the same playing field, and MS can provide a cheaper product, then fine.
      We are doing are selves a dis-service by not trying to get the govermant to adopt open standards.

      "Retraining the hundreds of thousands of people who use it, a fair number of whom are currently deployed is impractical."
      The long erm cost savings in raining them to use an open standard will pay for itself in a short period of time. Difficult? yes, but not impossibles, and very neccessary. If there is a single motivator to bring new features to any OS, it is a government requirement.

      "Every single product the military uses needs to be 100% documented and training programs need to be developed for both users and the support staff. That stuff isn't cheap."
      it is exteemely cheap in the long term. anybody in the goverment that does not think long term should be removed.

      " I'm not jumping for joy at this contract it's just that the usual slashdot 'should've used Linux' argument is irrelevant."

      it is VERY relevent. They should have used an open system. This is the ideal place for linux. this is where it would shine the brightest.

      Consider officer training. regardless of which branch, we need people who understands computers in the governmant. If I was younger, and didn't fill my youth with reckless days, I'd join.
      beside, in four years one of 2 thing will happen.
      the economy will be etter, and lmilitary experience always looks good on a resume.
      2)or thing will go to hell in a handbasket, in which case being in the military will help protect you.

      Just don't get married during your first 4. that almost always ends poorly.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    47. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The military is so desperate to recruit geeks, that they are developing armor-plated pocket protectors.

      Of course, maybe they just want geeks as human shields to draw fire away from the soldiers that do the real fighting.

    48. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 1

      If the game crashes or has backdoors or exploits, PEOPLE DON'T DIE.

      True, very good point, but do they respawn and heard the God/Announcer say "you've lost the lead".

      (I had to ask :) )

      --
      Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
    49. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1

      I think most of us who play Shadowbane might disagree with that statement.

      --
      mcp.kaaos

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    50. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Jason+Earl · · Score: 1

      The Army needs 100% file compatibility with MS Office like I need an extra pair of holes in my head. They can effectively force all of their suppliers and everyone they do business with to use OpenOffice formats. After all, if the U.S. Army says they want the spreadsheet in OpenOffice format then you will get a copy of OpenOffice.

      Now, I certainly agree that there are costs to changing software, and I even agree that it might be wise at this point to simply pay Microsoft for their software (especially considering the fact that it looks like they got a fairly good deal). However, I disagree completely with the idea that the U.S. Army has to worry about compatibility. They certainly would have to worry about the cost of migration their documents to OpenOffice formats, but they don't have to worry for a minute about being compatible with everyone else.

    51. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by boskone · · Score: 1

      But MS spends something like $4B/year on R and D that goes into their products, so to truly recreate the whole package (as others have mentioned, they are probably buying the catalog, i'm not sure) you're saying it'd be cheaper for the army to spend $4B/yr instead of $76M/yr to get the same thing? They'd also have a huge section of their organization focused on a non-core competency issue of software development.

      Just a thought.

    52. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by teakillsnoopy · · Score: 1

      A computer game isn't as difficult to make as
      military spec software. If the game crashes or
      has backdoors or exploits, PEOPLE DON'T DIE.

      Actually, if military spec software works, PEOPLE WILL DIE. People die no matter what.

    53. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by lotus87 · · Score: 1
      For probably a lot less than half a billion dollars they could hire Linus himself and probably have more than enough left over to hire Alan Cox, RMS, and pretty much whomever else they please.

      Sure they could hire those folks, but would those folks pass an intensive background investigation, be trusted top secret clearances, be willing to never talk about what they work on, work for 'da man', and be restricted on how quickly they can incorporate the newest technologies? There are plenty of qualified people out in the world, but when you talk about agnecies that have access to secret information, a technology background is just the beginning of your qualifications.

    54. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know of a few Army commands that are using WinXP on their networks so it must not be a no-no any longer.

    55. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by El+Cubano · · Score: 1

      ... Or, any sort of weapon for that matter. The military, like most large institutions, has a need for office automation apps, e-mail, and the like. And for this, they use Windows and Office. Warfighting software on warfighting networks is proprietary and doesn't run on Wintel machines.

      You must have been out of the service for a while. You are only partly correct about the non-wintel stuff. In the units I have been assigned to (recce) we have used lots of Sun, SGI, and other propritary stuff from Lockheed and some other vendors. But we have plenty of wintel running on warfighting networks all over the place, including sending intel reports, directing remote assets, and *GASP* actually navigating our recce assets. And believe me, it is unsettling knowing that the navigator is up front on a Gateway laptop with Win95 telling him where to fly.

    56. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

      Because SGML is a horrible committee standard that they're smart enough not to use.

    57. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by jpmorgan · · Score: 1
      Actually, in a twisted way (that fits well with Reaganomics), it does make sense for the govt to buy expensive, closed-source software. They are stimulating the economy by government spending.

      Dude, you're describing classic Keynsian stimulus, it's the complete antithesis to Reaganomics. Reagonomics would be to give the money right to Microsoft's board of directors, ostensibly in the belief that it'll "trickle down" to eveybody else...

    58. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by catfood · · Score: 1
      It's a variant of the "Who do you sue" problem.

      Sure. With the same answer: nobody.

      Why do Microsoft apologists spread the urban legend that you can sue Microsoft for flaws in its software? You can't. It's explicitly disclaimed in the EULA of every Microsoft product. The "who do you sue" argument is 100% red herring.

      Please keep such FUD out of this.

    59. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      I can't find anything on major problems due to Microsoft Windows malfunctioning - care to enlighten?

      Other than a warship rendered completely inert by a buffer overflow?

      http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,1398 7,00.html

    60. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by 1010011010 · · Score: 1

      The obvious solution is, of course, to ditch open standards altogether and use expensive proprietary formats.

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    61. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The military certainly uses windows to control weapons; all the time in the Navy at least...

    62. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Luyseyal · · Score: 1
      Yeah? How long will it take to debug it? How long will it take to get this custom-made Linux certified for DoD use? What is your definition of "easy to use"? Easiest of all to use is the most annoyingly ubiquitous commercial OS and Office apps, which most people already know how to use before they join. Who's gonna teach thoswe dopes in the finance corps how to use this custom OS? Who do they call when something doesn't work? Linus himself? Will the army really want to pay for its own in-house OS tech support? Where will they find enough people to man the phones who know how this particular custom-built version of Linux works?

      Nitpicks:

      1. DOD can contact NSA for a copy of their Linux. Surely the NSA knows how to put together a hardened system. If they don't, I want my money back.
      2. Windows/Office isn't necessarily easier to use, ceteris paribus; it's just ubiquitous.
      3. You're ignoring the fact that most FOSS apps are work-a-likes to their Windows cousins. If an IE user can click on links in Mozilla, surely a Word user can set the font to Bold in OOo or Abiword. If you're talking about modding out their desktop with fancy screensavers and shit, fuck that. This is a job, not their home computer.
      4. Hans Reiser said his company will support any Linux. He also recommends not getting support from the vendor due to conflict of interest problems. If the Army said "Well, we think this NSA Linux is the shit", I bet a number of Linux support companies would bid on it.
      5. Who would the users call? First, their local sysadmin; second, the Linux support contractor.

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    63. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Please see this.

      Basically, a buffer overrun in a non-MS program took down the beta system. It's hardly unusual for a beta test to have a couple issues, and it's apparently not even Microsoft's fault in this case.

      As for the eventual outcome of the USS Yorktown... "Smart Ship" initiatives successful . Apparently, the Navy disagrees with your assessment of it being a "major problem".

    64. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know of a few Army commands that are using WinXP on their networks so it must not be a no-no any longer.

      XP is just as secure as 2000 when it is on a domain (and has the necessary security patches installed of course).

    65. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by FeloniousPunk · · Score: 1

      You must have been out of the service for a while. You are only partly correct about the non-wintel stuff. In the units I have been assigned to (recce) we have used lots of Sun, SGI, and other propritary stuff from Lockheed and some other vendors. But we have plenty of wintel running on warfighting networks all over the place, including sending intel reports, directing remote assets, and *GASP* actually navigating our recce assets. And believe me, it is unsettling knowing that the navigator is up front on a Gateway laptop with Win95 telling him where to fly.
      I'll be out 8 years this August. I do work for the military now as a contractor, but far from the pointy end (USJFCOM). Most of the really important stuff we work with is on Unix machines. Even if a lot of stuff gets migrated over to Wintel, I still wouldn't be terribly worried. All the good stuff is on the SIPRNET or JWICS, and those are quite secure.

      --
      I know this because Tyler knows this.
    66. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      Basically, a buffer overrun in a non-MS program took down the beta system. It's hardly unusual for a beta test to have a couple issues, and it's apparently not even Microsoft's fault in this case.

      And then in your "evidence" link:

      A badly written (apparently non-Microsoft) application caused a buffer overrun.

      What exactly makes that apparent, other than the propaganda that passes for Microsoft training materials these days? Furthermore, are you telling me that it is not a major problem for the United States Navy, a force famous for its history of damage control and system redundancy on its ships to run management software whose kernel can be brought crashing down by one unhandled exception?

      Speaking of evidence, it appears to me, if you can look through the propaganda, that the navy has frozen the program. What other ships are currently deployed which use the "smart ship" management system? Try to come up with real evidence this time, and don't cite yourself - the only thing more childish is arguing with someone you've marked as a foe.

    67. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      What exactly makes that apparent, other than the propaganda that passes for Microsoft training materials these days?

      Uh, the Wired article you yourself linked to?

      Furthermore, are you telling me that it is not a major problem for the United States Navy

      It'd be a "major problem" if it hadn't happened during beta testing. If it'd happened in the "finished" system, then yes, it'd be a problem.

      it appears to me, if you can look through the propaganda, that the navy has frozen the program

      Did you even read the next sentence? "Having judged the Smart Ship a success, the Navy plans to freeze development of the Yorktown's technology infrastructure and begin deploying the technology and 'lessons learned,' on other vessels of a similar class."

      In other words - they're done with the development, now it's time to put it into real use.

      What other ships are currently deployed which use the "smart ship" management system?

      Smart Ship has not faded awayâ"like all innovative technology it's become the standard for today's cruisers. Installation of the second production Smart Ship system aboard USS Monterey (CG 61) was recently completed with a successful sea trial. Installation aboard the first West Coast Smart Ship, USS Mobile Bay (CG 53) began November 1. That's as of November, 2000 - I suspect more have been converted since then.

      the only thing more childish is arguing with someone you've marked as a foe.

      I believe you've already illustrated why I've got you marked as a foe. Doesn't mean I can't argue with you.

    68. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by loraksus · · Score: 1

      hmm, ok. You hire it support staff for a job where it assumed that they have bullets flying at you at some point in time - to say nothing that computers / servers are _very_ valid targets by the enemy.
      How much would you pay someone to do this?
      $100,000 a year? It's probably not an unreasonable starting point - I sure as hell wouldn't want to be sent to a foreign country where people want to kill me to do tech support for less - and I'm unemployed.

      Multiply this by 4 years and lets see how much money that adds up to, and how many people the army could afford.

      Granted, they could train their own people to support it right now, but these people _do_ have jobs and stuff to do right now - I somehow doubt "powerpoint training" will do it either.

      OK, and to be honest, the military _is_ currently deployed and if you've ever worked with users you know that _any_ change will result is a mass of support calls and complaints from users. Confusion is not something that you want in the armed forces.

      A lot of people in the armed services are even worse - some might call them ignorant or stupid - but the fact is a lot of them are intensely focused on doing their jobs - and they really could not care less about being technically literate.

      I think this _is_ a waste of money, and is probably a "spend it or lose it" issue, but I really don't think switching operating systems / major application programs is a good thing to do right now.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    69. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      Except for the Microsoft based Smart Ship the Navy got caught building, and thankfully had it blue screen in it's initial sea trials instead of getting a shipload of sailors killed in a real fight.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    70. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      Uh, the Wired article you yourself linked to?

      You mean this? (from TFA):

      The source of the problem on the Yorktown was that bad data was fed into an application running on one of the 16 computers on the LAN. The data contained a zero where it shouldn't have, and when the software attempted to divide by zero, a buffer overrun occurred -- crashing the entire network and causing the ship to lose control of its propulsion system.

      You'll notice I included the link referenced in the article. Follow it. It references an IE 4 flaw. Do you know who writes IE?

      But while we're following links, let's check out some of yours...

      "Over the past 18 months, approximately 20 versions of software have been tested at the GTSLBES."

      Looks like one of the "lessons learned" was to evaluate other software for the Smart Ship platform. I seriously doubt NT has very much to do with it anymore.

      I believe you've already illustrated why I've got you marked as a foe. Doesn't mean I can't argue with you.

      Perhaps, but it sure makes you look stupid when you lose.

    71. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      It references an IE 4 flaw.

      Which, having read both articles, appears to be an error. The first article says a zero was entered as data, causing a divide by zero error - whereas the IE vulnerability is caused by entering more than 256 characters in a res:// URL in IE4. So, either the Yorktown article is inaccurate, or the buffer overrun link is in error.

      "Over the past 18 months, approximately 20 versions of software have been tested at the GTSLBES."

      Again, another example of selective quoting.

      "The GTSLBES provides a test platform for vital main engine and electric plant control functionality while reducing the risk of conducting integration testing on board ship. Over the past 18 months, approximately 20 versions of software have been tested at the GTSLBES. It is at the GTSLBES where contractor-furnished systems (MCS, IBS, FCS, and the LAN) are integrated with government-furnished equipment (ICAS and DCQ). This is accomplished at the Navy's software support activity, (SSA). Once tested, the Navy delivers the integrated product to the waterfront."

      They're not testing different versions of operating systems, they're testing different versions of the software that runs the ship's engines. Has absolutely nothing to do with Windows NT, as far as I can tell.

    72. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      You know, normaly I'd be nice about this, but since I'm drunk and didn't get laid tonight I won't be :)

      Fuck you. Do your research. There are warships of the US Navy running windows NT near exclusively (except for firecontrol, and firecontrol only, because it's embedded, which is run by QNIX).

      Yeah, the armed forces need office, email etc...but they do also use windows boxes for critical apps like navigation, command and control etc.

      So it comes down to the fact that the navy is not smarter than me, and not only that, I'm not a MS basher (shit, I use it myself! It's a good desktop OS, if you use 2k/xp...better than linux by far), I'm just better informed than you are.

      Moron.

      Again, sorry fopr the harshnes..but I had a good night out, and then there;'s you telling me I don't know wtf I'm talking about. Use google, there's pics and even movies! out there showing I'm right...

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    73. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Tyreth · · Score: 1

      I wasn't referring to the blind masses :) Rather the slashdot brethren from America...though I didn't make that clear.

    74. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      Then why do they keep SMSing XP updates onto my XP machines? I think you are operating on dated information.

    75. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      That's not how the Army works. You don't fire and replace very many people. There's a lot of working (or not) with what you have.

      I don't know if you know this, but Army pay isn't exactly competitive.

    76. Re:This doesn't strike me as unreasonable. by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      Again, another example of selective quoting.

      I'm sorry, I missed the first one. But let's take your lead and try to look at things at face value. Starting with the GTSLBES. Your expanded (selected?) quote seems to suggest that the GTSLBES is the operating system. I, of course, must be misreading you, because the article clearly describes the GTSLBES as a facility, not a system, and even has a picture of it. Unless, of course, some mad modder out there has case modded a large land-based gas turbine.

      Even if I didn't misread you, one might notice, based on information in your quote, that the smart ship system now consists of both contractor and government supplied equipment. While open to interpretation, it seems unlikely that the Integrated Condition Assessment System (government-furnished) is a subset of the Machinery Control System (contractor furnished). It appears that the Navy developed the core of the smart ship system in house, which leads us to the most accurate point you've made so far about the current state of the smart ship system.

      Has absolutely nothing to do with Windows NT, as far as I can tell.

  21. Sounds.. by Lugor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    like the Army is paying for Microsoft's fine...

    Justice Department: Bad Microsoft.. you must pay $500 million and promise to never do it again.

    Defense Deparment: Here Microsoft.. $471 million for you...

    Right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing? Or does it?

    1. Re:Sounds.. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Pure coincidence: Unstable URL

      Drudge Report
      Thu Jun 26 2003 12:14:41 ET
      ROLL CALL ...

      Gates showed up at the White House on Wednesday afternoon for a substantive meeting with Homeland Security Department Secretary Tom Ridge. But when he was asked to produce some ID, Gates said he had left it in a vehicle parked nearby. ...

      Gates eventually made it past the gates for his meeting with Ridge. And then, with his ID presumably in his pocket, the billionaire huddled with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) to discuss tech policy.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  22. $471,000,000?!? by rampant+mac · · Score: 5, Funny

    $471,000,000 dollars? That's like SIXTEEN hammers!

    --
    I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    1. Re:$471,000,000?!? by hacker · · Score: 1
      $471,000,000 dollars? That's like SIXTEEN hammers!

      You do realize why hammers cost that much, right? Because the extra cash is funneled off into black projects and undocumented research.

    2. Re:$471,000,000?!? by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 3, Funny

      actually, It's 20 hammers. They've started melting down toilet seats to make them.

    3. Re:$471,000,000?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF?!!?11?!

    4. Re:$471,000,000?!? by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      No, it's for 494,000 sets of software licences, or so they say...

      Of course, we all know where that money really goes...

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    5. Re:$471,000,000?!? by gringo_l_amigo · · Score: 1

      If you can only buy 16 hammers with 471m$, you have a light problem with buying things... I can have approximately 58875000 hammers for that price. Or, 29437500 hammers and 942000000 nails!!! You probably meant hummers...

      --
      Wise men make proverbs, but fools repeat them. - Samuel Palmer
    6. Re:$471,000,000?!? by bubkus_jones · · Score: 2, Informative

      He's making a comment about how the military inflates the cost of various items so they can funnel the extra money to not-publicly-approved projects.

      Have you never watched the scene in Independence Day when they're at Area51, and the old Jewish dude makes a comment about "What, you think they actually spend $20 000 for a hammer, and $30 000 for a toilet seat?"

    7. Re:$471,000,000?!? by scoove · · Score: 5, Funny

      494,000 sets of software licences

      hmmm... wonder if this has anything to do with things:

      Microsoft intruduces powerful-new military battle interface
      "GI Bob" software to unify army command and control systems

      REDMOND, Wash., May 23, 2003 -- American combat military personnel may get upgraded this year following Microsoft's release of a new battle user interface. The new product, Microsoft GI Bob for Windows, is based on the innovative user interface system initially released by Microsoft in 1993 to consumer sectors.

      Featuring a powerful new intuition engine and updated interface, GI Bob represents common combat tasks in a easy-to-navigate windowpane, complete with the a refreshing new theme called QuansitHut(TM). Designed to simplify all aspects of military combat, experts acclaim GI Bob as an interface that "even a private from Arkansas could master," yielding strategic benefits to training and combat readiness requirements.

      Within GI Bob, soldiers can access battlefield data by selecting convenient icons like Sgt. Carter's desk (for current tasks), file cabinet (for archived materials), a desktop radio (for communications) and other readily-identifiable items. With the updated VirtualPyle assistant, GI Bob's audiovisual experience is complete with voiceovers and animated interactions with the on-screen helper.

      Microsoft GI Bob is available to authorized military purchasers and retails for $999. Contact your authorized Microsoft partner for details.

    8. Re:$471,000,000?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, talk about lack of humor..

    9. Re:$471,000,000?!? by Imperator · · Score: 1
      $471,000,000 dollars? That's like SIXTEEN hammers!
      That's like the amount of hardware they're using for the rebuilding efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq combined!
      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
    10. Re:$471,000,000?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...experts acclaim GI Bob as an interface that "even a private from Arkansas could master,"/i

      I wonder how a certain AWOL National Guard pilot would do?

  23. Must control by aliens · · Score: 1

    Fist of death!

    --
    -- taking over the world, we are.
  24. $471 million by nxg125 · · Score: 1

    How exactly does spending $471 million reduce costs? I'm not sure who's more delusional, the US Army or Microsoft.

  25. Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is thit any surprise from an organization that's lost 2 trillion dollars over the past 10 years? What is this, some kind of super-mafia or something?

  26. Army moto: by saden1 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "Spend as much as you can."

    Point is, the Army is not out to save money. Buying direct is a no-no. This way, they can as for more money next year.

    A friend of mine worked as an Army Core Engineer and he once told me they spend $2000 on a box of hammers.

    --

    -----
    One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    1. Re:Army moto: by Queuetue · · Score: 1

      How many hammers are in a box?

    2. Re:Army moto: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sure that's "Core" and not Corps?

      Also, I wonder how many hammers were in a box. Getting on up to 50 or 100, those hammers aren't too expensive.

    3. Re:Army moto: by mog · · Score: 1

      0.25

    4. Re:Army moto: by saden1 · · Score: 1

      hammers 30.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    5. Re:Army moto: by saden1 · · Score: 1

      Meant to say Corps....

      There were 30 hammers in the box.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
  27. Is The OS Actually Included? by Flamesplash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can we actually assume that the base OS is actually included in the $900+/comp. price? I think it's a little premature to assume so. Something not mentioned though is that this probably covers OS and software upgrades which can be expensive potentially

    I wonder if this basically is some sort of site license for all MS products for the Army.

    --
    "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
    1. Re:Is The OS Actually Included? by Stonehand · · Score: 1

      ...and perhaps a better support contract. Support => geek time => extremely expensive.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
  28. The Seattle PI has a little more by Poilobo · · Score: 4, Informative

    The deal $970 per seat includes OS, Exchange, SQL, and Office so that's about right.

    The article also says the US military seems to think Microsofts security problems were not significant enough to stop the deal.

    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/128059_msft military25.html

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    1. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, how about a link that works, the kind with no space in the middle? Yeah, that's the ticket.

    2. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by VEGETA_GT · · Score: 1

      US goverment testing of the Security of Windows

      Rick "Hey bill, try logging into this network drive"

      Bill "it well not let me in"

      Rick "Cool, its safe, Call the boss, we can use windows, its secure"

      Between all the viruses, bugs and security holes, the US well have to spend another $471,000,000 in Fire walls and other hacker protection. Yep, thank god I am in canada. We still run IBM Dos on our military systems.

    3. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by Fjord · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For workstations, certainly not. MS is the standard. However, when bidding on a logistics contract, one of our partners had to get many exemptions to be able to bid with us because their part of the solution was IIS/ASP based.

      --
      -no broken link
    4. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Security probably matters sweet FA for these machines. I doubt they'd purchase stock computers for their connections to the internet. Im guessing most of these machines are terminals for inside the military's own network, with no exposure to the outside world, and would probably not contain any uber-important information or functionality, just more desktops.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    5. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by mblase · · Score: 1

      The article also says the US military seems to think Microsofts security problems were not significant enough to stop the deal.

      Although I'm sure several individuals in the Middle East are wringing their hands with glee right now. One or two well-constructed worm viruses and half the Army officers could be emailing their critical documents right to them. I hope the Army saved a few bucks for a killer firewall as well....

    6. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by A55M0NKEY · · Score: 1

      $970/toilet seat?

      --

      Eat at Joe's.

    7. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by pewgeek · · Score: 1

      The Philly Bus Journal ran an article [free registration required] on this last week. Basically says that Softmart didn't even try to offer the lowest price to the army, instead they offered technology that allows the army to track their software more easily. It tracks licenses, where the software was deployed, versions, upgrade info, etc. The article says that they do this through a web site that links to a portal the Army has for their people to access info. The claim is that by providing this automated process, the army can reduce its overall software costs.

    8. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The deal also includes the cost of integration. The OS is probably Windows 2000, some will undoubtedly be server edition. Add the complexity of configuring a system for NISPOM (see particularly Chapter 8) and I can easily see such a cost as justifiable.

    9. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by geekoid · · Score: 1

      no, it is not about right. In a competitive market, pay near retail would have been obsurd. they should have paid well below retail, espcially considering the profit margin.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    10. Re:The Seattle PI has a little more by nicholasharbour · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't understand how the military networks are set up. Its airgap all the way for anything with a classification level or even most non-classified mission-oriented systems. The only way for the system to fail is for some idiot user to manually put things in the wrong place. At that level it doesnt matter how many security bugs are in your software, your users are going to hose you every time. They keep this to a minimum with strick punishments and constant training and most of all, red tape. Red tape both figuratively and literally. :)

      --

      Nearly half of all people are below average
  29. An Army of Windows by citadelgrad · · Score: 1

    Join the army and learn windows!!!

    Microsoft can finally sell BOB(Bombs over Baghdad) to someone!

    --
    Losers whine about doing their best ....

    Winners go home and f*ck the prom queen!
  30. with that kind of money.... by xirtam_work · · Score: 1

    I would have thought that they could have their own software and operating system developed for them.

    After all some work has already been done by the NSA on SEC Linux, why not capitalise on the outrageous amount of quality free software and plough some tax payers money into employing skilled linux and unix professionals to bring everything up to your desired spec.

    Then you can do whatever you want with it and don't have to pay any more licences.

    1. Re:with that kind of money.... by bnet41 · · Score: 1

      With the way government contracts work and stuff, the TCO on Open source could easily be twice this figure. The process for hiring people in government can be pretty lengthy, and ivolve a lot of cost. I think they wanted an OS that was easy to use, and fills their needs. Also, most of the staff and personnel are familiar with Windows I'm sure.

    2. Re:with that kind of money.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, this is the American government remember. Linux is dangerously anti-American, anti-capitalist, almost communist and doesn't involve large sums of money going to big American firms, like large sums of money should do in Shrub's New World Order.

      </sarcasm> (except for the NWO bit)

  31. Thanks to the ARMY for feeding my children. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Good decision. It's nice to see that bigger organisations getting normal again and use software that works, costs money and which is proven to be some sort of industry standards. The ARMY secures a lot of peoples employment by this decision. They can work on software, earn money, sell the software for a good price, knowing that they can feed their kids with the money they take home every month..

    I am an open source developer and it sucks working the hell out on professional software without getting paid for the shit I am doing. Not that I don't get paid I also need to deal with a lot of complaining and ranting faggots all the time.

    Open Source is killing legitimate work of professionals, software engineers and those who need to feed their kids with the money they earn each month. Open Source means that the company can't make any serious money and thus can't even pay their employees.

  32. Welcome to the world of government contract$. by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 5, Informative

    My friend did some contract work for the Army a few months back. They needed a pair of IBM RS/6000 P-series 660s, fully loaded, attached to a pair of FastT700 fibrechannel arrays. Close to $1M worth of hardware, by my rough estimates, having purchased similar hardware in the past.

    This was for a workgroup of 30 people.

    Government contracts are the best.

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    1. Re:Welcome to the world of government contract$. by machine+of+god · · Score: 1

      That's barely enough to run the simulator we're working on right now, and we're a workgroup of 20.

    2. Re:Welcome to the world of government contract$. by Pfhreakaz0id · · Score: 2, Informative

      we've got about $2 million worth of Sun hardware about 15 feet from me at the gov agency I'm contracting at. This is for running databases and web apps for a user base of a few hundred users.

    3. Re:Welcome to the world of government contract$. by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 1

      This was a web server.

      - A.P.

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  33. The old joke said: by Noryungi · · Score: 0

    Army Intelligence.

    A contradiction in terms.

    'Nuff said.

    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
  34. There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by taumeson · · Score: 2, Troll
    Keith Hodson, a Microsoft spokesman, said the contract could help the Army reduce its costs and "validates the Army's belief in our security model."

    What...are you FUCKING kidding? This is basically worst-case scenario when it comes to security. Anybody remember M$ offering their source to China? Hello, McFly?

    The U.S. government is investing aggressively in technology as part of its war on terror and focus on national security.

    Of course they are....everything comes back to 9/11, right?!

    The six-year deal, which also involved a software reseller called Softmart that will get a commission

    Somebody...find out which congressman/senator's wife/retired general has a major stake in Softmart. There's got to be collusion SOMEWHERE. This move is too boneheaded and expensive for this not to be an insider deal.

    although....

    Anybody know if any of these costs include all the immense testing, or paperwork, or the percentage that gets siphoned off for black projects?

    I'm not being snide about that last one...a percentage of all projects goes into black projects..that's how they fund the Skunkworks, after all.

    1. Re:There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      The six-year deal, which also involved a software reseller called Softmart that will get a commission

      They wouldn't have gotten much of a commission on a $0 product, now would they? Of *course* they're better off recommending MS!

    2. Re:There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by chundo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What...are you FUCKING kidding? This is basically worst-case scenario when it comes to security. Anybody remember M$ offering their source to China? Hello, McFly?

      Whereas Linux source code is entirely beyond China's reach?

      -j

    3. Re:There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Softmart is an authorized reseller for leading I.T. publishers, such as Microsoft, IBM/Lotus, Novell, Adobe and Symantec and for hardware manufacturers such as Hewlett Packard, Seagate and Intel. We combine wide product selections of the latest hardware and software, competitive pricing, innovative distribution and fulfillment services with superior customer service, world class training and integration support to provide a unique service to businesses around the world.

      Softmart began as a Philadelphia area software retailer. Founded in 1983, that single store evolved into a global corporate and government software/hardware reseller. Today, Softmart provides international services and support to customers in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Asia, the Pacific Rim and the Americas.

      Headquartered in Downingtown, PA, Softmart now services the global corporate arena. The company employs over 200 people and has sales representatives throughout the United States.

      Softmart's vision and mission statements are very important to us. They are reminders that Softmart's level of customer commitment and quality support must be maintained for each and every customer. Softmart stands behind the products we sell and the customer-oriented services we provide.

      Softmart's Vision
      Softmart will be the leading provider of information technology products and services by delivering innovative, creative and cost-effective solutions.

      Softmart Mission
      Every day we anticipate, listen to and deliver solutions that respond to our customers', partners', employees' and shareholders' needs.

      Every day we identify opportunities to create business efficiencies by leveraging technology and our industry expertise.

      Every day we provide high quality service in all aspects of our business.

    4. Re:There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by jafuser · · Score: 1

      Somebody...find out which congressman/senator's wife/retired general has a major stake in Softmart. There's got to be collusion SOMEWHERE. This move is too boneheaded and expensive for this not to be an insider deal.

      I think this needs empahsis. This should be quite obvious...

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    5. Re:There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by listen · · Score: 1

      Remember Jim Allchin swearing under oath in the DOJ trial that revealing Windows source would present National Security problems?

      MS is guilty of either treason or perjury. I'm hoping for the former.

      On the other hand, the Linux code already has been looked over quite a few times, there are no glaringly obvious faults that its designers would like to hide away. Obviously bugs come about, that what you pay for software with an expanding feature set.

    6. Re:There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by taumeson · · Score: 1

      Touche....but that's not where I was coming from. In the article it said "'validates the Army's belief in our security model.'", and that's what I have a hard time accepting.

    7. Re:There's more to this story, I guarantee it. by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Whereas Linux source code is entirely beyond China's reach?"

      The difference is that the feds also have access to the Linux source. Not so with Windows.

  35. Minority Preference? by Lester67 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Microsoft is not a minority owner company. I'm curious to know if the "reseller" is listed as one.

    If it is, that's why the Army *HAD* to use a reseller.

  36. I thought... by medscaper · · Score: 3, Funny
    Saw that title, US Army Signs $471,000,000 Deal for Microsoft Software...

    I was thinking, "Wow! Bill finally sold!"

    And then, "Hmmm. They'll probably be enforcing those EULAs with an SKS muzzle in your mouth, now."

    --
    Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
    1. Re:I thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hmmm. They'll probably be enforcing those EULAs with an SKS muzzle in your mouth, now

      nah, this is the goverment, why use a cheap $300 rifle like an SKS with they can use a $1500 Colt M16

    2. Re:I thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The M16 costs more like $500 in bulk. The $1500 price for civilian AR-15s is a supply/demand issue (no more mil-spec AR-15s being sold to civilians). But you can still get a brand new one for around $700 if you don't need all the fancy trim like flashhiders, grenade launchers, etc.

  37. Re:Keeps the money local, I suppose. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    no no no no no no. A cash cow is a mature product that you "milk", selling it for a nice flow of profits while spending a minimum amount on R&D to improve it. Windows, Office, and Microsoft's other monopoly products are cash cows. So the government is supporting Microsoft's cash cows, not it's own. And the Bush administration is supporting one of it's campaign contributors.

    What are the government's cash cows.? We taxpayers. Mooooo! Like it?

  38. but but but ... by CERDIP · · Score: 1

    the article says 471 Million bucks. Which is nuts, but reasonable. The base post by michael says 471 BILLION bucks ! That's nuts too, but unreasonable.

    --
    ---- ---- --- -- --- ------ Keep Cool But Do Not Freeze
    1. Re:but but but ... by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      1 million = 1e6 = 1,000,000
      471 million= 471e6=471,000,000

  39. About $200,000,000 wasted by mao+che+minh · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Imagine, the US government could have used $200,000,000 on new Linux systems, and used the other $200,000,000 in training (which creates jobs) and new Linux jobs. They would have access to the code, alleviated the threat of viruses and worms, and insured that they would save money on concurrent license fees (largely, but not completely).

    Pretty sad that our military wastes extreme amounts of money on computer systems that they know they will have to upgrade shortly (more $$$, no jobs), will keep them open to the threat of widespread viruses (more $$$, no new jobs), and contains code that they can not see (no new jobs). This is fucking sad, man.

    1. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "alleviated the threat of viruses and worms"

      I think you mean mitigated. That is reduced as opposed to removed the threat.

    2. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they want a speedy deployment rather than retooling, retraining and so on.

    3. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by sogoodsofarsowhat · · Score: 1

      LEt us NOT FORGET, one point, this is for the US military. Linux is not a US company (hell its not a company) Microsoft is a US company. In the end, I prefer our military dollars get spent with a US company. Sure they have offices and facilities all over the world. But Bill still lives and is an American AND THAT alone makes it OK! Just like if IBM had gotten the contract. It woulda been fine for me.

      --
      . I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
    4. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by aurelian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uhh.. hello Captain America, where do you think Redhat is from then?

    5. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is a joke right? please!

      i might get smoted for talking shit but this entire thread has been so full of shit it is not funny.

    6. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by A55M0NKEY · · Score: 1

      For half a billion bucks they could have started with linux/KDE and polished it up to the point that your grandmacould run it, then developed their own version of any software they thought they were missing.

      --

      Eat at Joe's.

    7. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by fitten · · Score: 1

      Interesting, could we see your proposal with line item figures? or did you just make this number up like most folks do?

    8. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by Malcontent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For that kind of money the Army could have hired the entire development teams of KDE, Samba, postgresql, and apache.

      Imagine having that kind of support at your fingertips.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    9. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by turgid · · Score: 1

      Unfortunatley, what with Linux (and GNU) being Free and collective efforts, and popular in Europe, South America and Asia, it has the "pinko commie hippy" stigma attached to it in conservative circles. Don't expect any progress from the US govenrment any time soon.

    10. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, the cost of converting over to Linux will not be as inexpensive as you think.

      Between the costs of qualifying an approved Linux distribution and retraining a huge number of people to use and maintain the OS on the client and server side, the cost could run into many billions of US dollars. The US government has so much invested in Microsoft products that any conversion to Linux would be exorbitantly expensive, even with the fact Linux has no per-server or per-seat licenses.

    11. Re:About $200,000,000 wasted by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I think that I saw the deal as including 6 years of upgrades. So it could be worse.

      OTOH, I still think it's a pretty silly way to waste money.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  40. Stupid white man. by fluch · · Score: 1

    Says it all, doesn't it?

    1. Re:Stupid white man. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but your post says a lot about you, ASSTARD.

  41. Who's been whispering in their ear? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe some paid spokesman for industry telling them "If you use Open BSD you'll be helping the terrorists!"

    The world is getting to be an ubsurd place. Be nice to move to the mountains or something away from the all these greedy, pawing sociopaths.

  42. 494000 computers by Lord+Kholdan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Exactly how many computers is that/soldier?

    More then one I'd bet. Why?

    1. Re:494000 computers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isnâ(TM)t a case of RTFA, it's a case of GAFC (Get A F*cking Clue) There are approximately 2 million enlisted people in the armed forces. I cannot find specific numbers for each branch, but assuming they are evenly distributed, that's 500,000 in the Army. Now factor in the reserves, the National Guard, and civilians that work for the army, you are well above 494,000.

      Just because during your buddy Clinton's term, he reduced the military to a pitiful 1.5 million enlisted, doesnâ(TM)t mean Bush let it stay there. Americans tend to get pissy when we are attacked, and they join the services to do something about it, which thank god Bush is in office and doing something about it. We'd still be hiding in a lock box if Gore was in charge.

  43. Minister M.S. by BenjyD · · Score: 2, Funny

    " Keith Hodson, a Microsoft spokesman, said the contract could help the Army reduce its costs and "validates the Army's belief in our security model.""

    I guess the Iraqi information minister's initials being M.S. isn't a coincidence then - he appears to work for them

    1. Re:Minister M.S. by Bull999999 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And there are people who actually believe that health care run by the government would be better.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
  44. True cost... by BobRooney · · Score: 2, Interesting

    While the cost of microsoft products, retail or OEM is substantially higher than Open Source alternatives, there is a consideration that is not addressed by that cost: Training.

    Most of the kids going into the army have some experience with computers: computers running Windows. The more familiar new recruits are with Army technology the less training will be required and the less time/resources/money need to be invested in getting newly enlisted GIs up to speed. The military is like a business in many ways. They write memos, reports, letters, make spreadsheets and send email. The most efficient way of getting all personel on the same page technologically is to deploy the "lowest common denominator". That is to say, software that is good enough and easy enough to use.

    1. Re:True cost... by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Wired had a story in the pre-war buildup about how few Mac's are to be found in an Army field operations. The Army picks one standard and goes with it...

    2. Re:True cost... by Jonner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Training is one of the main things the military does. They get troops for several years at a time and put large training investments into them. The military have their own ways of doing things and rarely conform to civilian standards. From talking with my roommate who was in the Army, it sounds like it's almost a self sufficient society.

      I suspect choosing Microsoft products is more about standardizing within the Army (or lining somebody's pockets for the conspiracy theory view) than what goes on in the civilian world. If they can train men to kill with rifles, grenades and machine guns, can't they train them to select some files in Explorer or type "ls?"

    3. Re:True cost... by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      There probably aren't many New Beetles in Army field operations, either. And what few there are, alas, probably don't have a flower in the dashboard's vase.

  45. Big Deal by usurper · · Score: 1

    This may be impressive, but Linux has the City of Largo, FL. Eat it, MS!

  46. Microsoft hardly creates jobs by 73939133 · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you are concerned with job creation, Microsoft is the wrong company to give money to. First of all, Microsoft needs much fewer employees than other industries to generate each $1m in revenue. In addition, since these are probably sales of existing software, there will be almost no job creation from those sales at all. Furthermore, Microsoft has a lot of its jobs overseas, so much of Microsoft's already measly job creation doesn't even take place in the US.

    1. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      True enough, I was just playing devils advocate. Can I have my GNU Members card back please? :-)

      Actually that brings up a good point though. MS is known for perma-temps and overseas [HP is also lesser known for that but does it too]. Maybe we could use the new military equiped with MS crap and bomb India or wherever they are shipping these jobs...

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by jspectre · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, you're wrong. Think about all the support people who will be needed for all those machines. There's going to be a lot of IT people needed in the Army now to install and support all those systems. Either military personnel or outside contractors.

      *nix is great if you need computer systems that are secure, work and are cost effective. But while it's a very good server OS it probably wouldn't meet the Army's needs very well on the desktop.

      Windows* boxes are wonderful if you want to spend a lot of money on software, hardware, people to maintain those systems, maintain their security and get half the work done in twice the time. Hopefully the Army won't be using it for servers, or anything else important. I'd hate to have to reboot my tank in the middle of a battlefield.

      The money won't be used to create jobs at Microsoft directly but it sure will create a lot of them indirectly.

      Personally I'm a little disappointed with where my tax dollars just went.

      --

      abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

    3. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by mst76 · · Score: 1
      If you are concerned with job creation, Microsoft is the wrong company to give money to. First of all, Microsoft needs much fewer employees than other industries to generate each $1m in revenue. In addition, since these are probably sales of existing software, there will be almost no job creation from those sales at all. Furthermore, Microsoft has a lot of its jobs overseas, so much of Microsoft's already measly job creation doesn't even take place in the US.
      All reasons why Microsoft is such a great company, from a shareholders POV.
    4. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by ortholattice · · Score: 2, Insightful
      For a fraction of 1/2 billion, the Army could fund whatever cleanup or new features are needed in OpenOffice.org, etc. to satisfy their requirements. And then they'd have the software free forever after, and of course the rest of the world would benefit from it also. And it would create the jobs needed to perform this development. Everyone (except Microsoft) would win: taxpayers pay less, and the economy gets a boost with these new jobs.

      Sadly, it seems instead that it's all going to Microsoft. The money will probably mostly go to pad their $40 billion (or whatever it is now) in the bank.

    5. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by halo8 · · Score: 2, Funny

      ahh but think of it.. all thoes M$ foriengers will be getting US taxpayers dollars.
      there forieng govermetns will tax the M$ employees and thoes tax dollars will go towards terrorist ^h^h^h^h^h^h freedom fighters.
      then the US will spent more taxpayer dollars bombing said freedom fighters ^h^h^h^h^h terrorists.

      SOOOOO... the point of this rant, is that the US Army is in reality just re-investing in itself

      --
      The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
    6. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never been to Redmond, have you?

      With 200 buildings, and active (although extremely selective) hiring, Microsoft really does create jobs for U.S. high-tech.

    7. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Did I offend someone? good that means I'm having the right amount of fun.

      And for yoru information the moose was asking for it.

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    8. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by sheldon · · Score: 2

      If you are concerned with job creation, Microsoft is the wrong company to give money to.

      As I sit here, developing a program for our company using VS.NET and linked to a backend SQL Server database, I would have to disagree.

      First of all, Microsoft needs much fewer employees than other industries to generate each $1m in revenue.

      In other words, as a customer I get far more software value for my $1m given to Microsoft than I would get giving it to any other company. That presents me with greater opportunities to customize the software for my specific business needs.

      In addition, since these are probably sales of existing software, there will be almost no job creation from those sales at all.

      Where do you think the money goes? A black hole.

      Let's say every MS employee now gets a $30k bonus. Each one goes out and buys a new car... now you have job creation at car dealerships and manufacturing plants.

      Microsoft has a lot of its jobs overseas, so much of Microsoft's already measly job creation doesn't even take place in the US.

      That's ok, the US military has a lot of its jobs overseas as well.

    9. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by Gsus411 · · Score: 1

      Eh.... the $40B is just Bill's fortune. Or at least that is what it was before the .bomb. M$ has way more than $40B.

    10. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you're wrong. Think about all the support people who will be needed for all those machines.

      Hahahah! I work on an Air Force base, and I'll tell you right now: there will NEVER be a shortage of 'support people' on any U.S. military base. That's because they task recruits with answering helpdesk phones. It doesn't matter if they know anything or nothing, all they have to do is be able to classify problems according to very well documented scripts (the 'tell you what to say' kind, not the 'collection of computer commands' kind) and pass you off to one of the (relatively few) clueful people.
      They do not hire contractors for windows support. I'm lucky that I understand *nix because that's the only way I got hired as a contractor.
      Remember, the military will not hire out for things they can make recruits do. Why bother?

    11. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by madskills · · Score: 0

      You have clearly never been to Redmond, Washington. All the major product and support groups are located there. Microsoft rents the entire Safeco Field stadium (home of the Mariners) for their company meetings (of Puget Sound based employees). There is something to the tune of 30,000 Microsoft employees in Western Washington.

      Of course Microsoft has some operations overseas, but any company would be stupid not to in todays global economy.

    12. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by TechnoPope · · Score: 1

      Because good karma only keeps me down... I'm actually an intern for Microsoft this summer, and every day I walk past new construction on the campus. Maybe those buildings are for show, but even now, Microsoft has employed enough people to operate a few construction crews.

      Furthermore, Microsoft has a lot of its jobs overseas, so much of Microsoft's already measly job creation doesn't even take place in the US.

      So does every major global company. But it's not like they decided, "No more new American Jobs." Especially since every Microsoft corporate location has to hire an army of grounds keepers, security guards, cooks, janitors, and other support people.

      --
      Slashdot...it's like Fox news, but without the biased sl...or maybe not.
    13. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I find your argument compelling. Simply because it begs the question:

      I am the military. I want a computer system my recruits can use. Linux is okay, but not quite there. So we'll buy windows instead. But wait, that $471 MILLION dollars could by a lot of pizza and Mountain Dew for the KDE/Gnome and OpenOffice guys...

      And yes, the government would forever have an OS and app suite that it could use, and the KDE/Gnome/OO guys would be financially motivated to make it hum... ARGH!

    14. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you forget the IT jobs it generates... while MS on it's own may not have many employees in the grand scheme (they have alot more than you seem to alude to), the number of jobs generated as outfall is enourmous... developers, managers, researchers, analysts, programmers, IS/IS support, etc... without a real, standards oriented os holding the line, you have fratricide and what we saw when PCs first came out and there were lots of operating systems and competing companies doing their own thing with no interoperability... the industry will slump, markets evaporate, companies fall, and people take ten steps back in terms of technology. No thanks.

      And don't spin me the line that Linux and it's legally embattled derivitives is the answer... as has been logically pointed out and modded up through out this thread, PHD and KISS applies for most users and people simply don't want Linux yet, and probably will never enmasse. Further, and bitch and moan about it, alot of IT folks don't want to learn the intracies of a 20 year old, archaic OS when they can have something more simple and generally robust (maybe not as stable, but for them that's a bonus too really... keeps them employed in greater numbers) that they can install and then focus on service.

    15. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "There's going to be a lot of IT people needed in the Army now to install and support all those systems."

      IIRC, IBM operates a larger NT/2K/XP support team than even Microsoft.

    16. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by 73939133 · · Score: 1

      Actually, you're wrong. Think about all the support people who will be needed for all those machines. There's going to be a lot of IT people needed in the Army now to install and support all those systems. Either military personnel or outside contractors.

      Whether you run Linux or Windows, you are going to need IT people to install and support those machines.

      And to the degree that Windows is harder to maintain and support than Linux (which it probably is), the additional jobs it might create relative to Linux are unproductive: they cost money, but they don't produce any extra value or output. If you have the money to employ people in unproductive jobs, you might as well spend that money on having them do something productively.

      And, of course, the $471m that you would save on licensing costs when going with Linux over Windows would be a nice chunk of money for tax breaks or other programs to help the economy.

      But while it's a very good server OS it probably wouldn't meet the Army's needs very well on the desktop.

      I disagree. The only reason many other organizations are still using Microsoft software is for compatibility with outside entities. But the Army is large and powerful enough that they can pick their desktop software. Something like OpenOffice running on Gnome or KDE is the ideal environment for them: robust, easy to use, powerful, and cheap.

      The money won't be used to create jobs at Microsoft directly but it sure will create a lot of them indirectly.

      No, the $471m will not create lots of outside jobs, the $471m will go to Microsoft investors. The outside jobs needed to install and maintain Windows will cost the tax payer additional hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

    17. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by 73939133 · · Score: 1

      As I sit here, developing a program for our company using VS.NET and linked to a backend SQL Server database, I would have to disagree.

      If Microsoft weren't selling VS.NET or SQL Server, would you be cleaning toilets instead? I don't think so. You would be programming in some other language for some other database server, say, Java and Oracle, or Python and PostgreSQL.

      Furthermore, none of the $471m go to pay for your job, they exclusively go to Microsoft.

      In other words, as a customer I get far more software value for my $1m given to Microsoft than I would get giving it to any other company. That presents me with greater opportunities to customize the software for my specific business needs.

      No, Microsoft just overcharges you, and they can do that because they have a near monopoly position in many areas. They can also do it because people like you prefer wasting their employer's money on overpriced software instead of improving their skills to the point where they can do more with less.

      Let's say every MS employee now gets a $30k bonus. Each one goes out and buys a new car... now you have job creation at car dealerships and manufacturing plants.

      MS employees are fairly well-off. If you give an extra $30k bonus to someone who is well-off, they won't spend it. (The last $30k windfall I got just disappeared into my savings account.)

      [Microsoft has a lot of its jobs overseas, so much of Microsoft's already measly job creation doesn't even take place in the US.] That's ok, the US military has a lot of its jobs overseas as well.

      The US military overseas mostly consists of US citizens and US tax payers, so the US military workforce abroad is not comparable to Microsoft's workforce abroad.

      In any case, personally I'm all for the US tax payer supporting the Indian and Chinese IT industry; God knows, the US has drained away enough talents from those countries. However, I suspect US tax payer support for foreign countries was not what people had in mind when they were arguing that this purchase was good because the $471m would "create jobs".

    18. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by jspectre · · Score: 1

      yes. but the article is about the army. not ibm.

      --

      abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

    19. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by jspectre · · Score: 1

      And to the degree that Windows is harder to maintain and support than Linux (which it probably is), the additional jobs it might create relative to Linux are unproductive: they cost money, but they don't produce any extra value or output. If you have the money to employ people in unproductive jobs, you might as well spend that money on having them do something productively.

      And, of course, the $471m that you would save on licensing costs when going with Linux over Windows would be a nice chunk of money for tax breaks or other programs to help the economy.

      Oh. I don't disagree with you there. But we are talking about the armed forces, known for spending $600 on a "hexagonal locking device" (aka. standard nut) and $1000 on toilet seats. Spending money wisely is not something they do.

      I disagree. The only reason many other organizations are still using Microsoft software is for compatibility with outside entities. But the Army is large and powerful enough that they can pick their desktop software. Something like OpenOffice running on Gnome or KDE is the ideal environment for them: robust, easy to use, powerful, and cheap.

      Look, I'm as big a *nix bigot as the geek next to me, but for the average consumer *nix just isn't ready for the desktop yet. OpenOffice still has problems, bugs, compatability issues and lacking features that MS Office has. It also runs slow even on the fastest machines. Gnome & KDE are great as well but still aren't ready for prime time. (Sorry guys.. but compare them to the polished look and feature set of OS X and Windows. They just aren't there yet.)

      No, the $471m will not create lots of outside jobs, the $471m will go to Microsoft investors. The outside jobs needed to install and maintain Windows will cost the tax payer additional hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

      Hmm.. You're right. I miscalculated. The Army will blow another $471M (and probably a lot more).

      --

      abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

    20. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by 73939133 · · Score: 1

      Look, I'm as big a *nix bigot as the geek next to me, but for the average consumer *nix just isn't ready for the desktop yet.

      I disagree.

      OpenOffice still has problems, bugs,

      And MS Office and Windows are problem-free and bug-free? You must never have used them, or maybe you have used them so much that you just know "don't press that button--it will crash". I use both XP and Linux regularly, and XP and Office have many more problems than a Linux desktop with equivalent functionality. Worse, Microsoft keeps breaking things during their updates.

      compatability issues

      So does MS Office--it is incompatible with itself in some cases, and it doesn't implement standard formats correctly either.

      and lacking features that MS Office has.

      So? The largest number of features doesn't make for the best office suite. OpenOffice has everything an office suite needs and more. In some areas, it actually is significantly more featureful than MS Office.

      It also runs slow even on the fastest machines.

      KDE and Gnome are very responsive on even low-end desktop machines (1GHz, 256M). They aren't any "slower" than the Windows or OS X GUI.

      Gnome & KDE are great as well but still aren't ready for prime time. (Sorry guys.. but compare them to the polished look and feature set of OS X and Windows. They just aren't there yet.)

      Sorry, but your objection comes down to "Gnome, KDE, and OpenOffice aren't identical to Windows or OS X". Well, they aren't and they won't be, if not for any other reason than that Windows and OS X both contain some pretty significant blunders for systems that want to be mainstream desktop operating systems.

      The current Linux desktop has to fear no comparison with Windows or OS X. Gnome and KDE are full-featured, high quality desktop environments. If they have a failing at all, it is that they try to emulate Windows and OS X too closely.

    21. Re:Microsoft hardly creates jobs by jspectre · · Score: 1

      obviously you're more of a *nix bigot than i am. we could argue this point until we're both blue in the face. as far as corporate america is concerned ms windows/office is the way to go, regardless of what the readers of /. thinks...

      no os is perfect. no application is perfect. none ever will be (else we'd all be out of jobs).

      --

      abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

  47. taxpayers fueling the economy by eurostar · · Score: 1

    the whole point is to subsidise US companies,(MS, BOING etc) and thus the US economy, through taxpayers money. This is the reason why US "defense" spending is so high. And then, when you have all these toys to play with, you have to give them a playing field...or two...

  48. Conspiracy theory... by mszeto · · Score: 1

    I bet this money only include the OS and M$ Office... the money will be laundered somehow and end up on a military project we don't know about...

    Didn't they get caught paying 95$ for a screw a few years back?

    1. Re:Conspiracy theory... by jm2morri · · Score: 1, Funny

      Let's leave the hooker budget out of the discussion.

  49. Yea, details not provided by GMontag · · Score: 4, Insightful

    although the article unfortunately doesn't provide details

    My suspicion is that there are enough details left out that the author and editor could print an alarmist article.

    Further suspicion is that there are MANY MORE aspects of this contract tha have been conveniently, or ignorantly, omitted.

    Little things, like perhaps Smartsoft has the better GSA rate for MS software than MS itself does? Maybe Smartsoft underbid their supplier and is providing professional services in addition to the software? Who knows, since no link to the contract award is provided and no refrence to what sort of purchase this "story" is referring, or avoiding to refer.

    You guys see this all the time with the $2B/aircraft stories, that conveniently leave out all of the special tools and other pricy items that come along with each Squadron delivered with only the "journalist" obscuring the real cost of the airplane since those costs are published buy the GAO with regularity. How is this any different or even news?

    1. Re:Yea, details not provided by Neutron+Bob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm really curious how much of that contract is for actual product and how much is for consulting and maintenance for actually building the system.

      I used to work for a company that made business software and would often sign deals with organizations like the Army and Navy for multiple thousands of seats of our product. A good part of the contract was for all the consulting and maintenance we'd provide to them to get it all set up and any further help they would need for the next year or so. Its not a bad model, because after their initial year of maintenance ran out, we'd get to renew that part of the contract for another large sum of money and repeat.

  50. ... and IBM gets $380 million from three hospitals by stevesliva · · Score: 1

    News.com story.
    Of course, IBM is actually selling services for the most part... when the Army's microcrap starts deteriorating, Microsoft probably won't answer the phone.

    --
    Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
  51. What they say/what they do by burgburgburg · · Score: 1
    What they say: We support our armed forces and want them to be strong and technologically advanced

    What they do: Lock the Army into a sweetheart contract that drains resources and supplies them with the most hackable, insecure, bloated OS available bar none.

  52. Canada... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy crap.

    It's things like this that make me glad I live in Canada.

    That's like our whole military budget right there...

  53. Another Reason by FedeTXF · · Score: 1

    Another reason to oppose US's "war on terror", which is just a war on every country not doing business with the US companies.

  54. In Canada... by TheVidiot · · Score: 2, Funny


    We don't need no stinking computers! All of our equipment is 60's vintage with add-on computers. So when the ECM hits, they can just revert to manual operation.

    ---

  55. Re:Keeps the money local, I suppose. by Rapsey · · Score: 1, Informative

    Well actualy corporate america is by no means US's cash cow. Do you know why? because they dont pay taxes. Thats right you read it right. The biggest american coorporations dont pay taxes. Thats what an army of lawyers can achieve. It isnt hard to guess who pays the taxes for them...

  56. When Evil Goes Out With Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sit down, take a beer and... take another beer!

  57. Give the money to me.... by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    and I'll employee some! out of work programmers and designers to work on GNU/Linux, we could even consult with the army to make the software better for them.

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    1. Re:Give the money to me.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, you'll try to drag in a 'social responsiblity clause' plus your developers will wander off to 'scratch their itch' often and deadlines won't be met.

  58. irrelevant by dh003i · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's still OUR 400 million dollars. We could have gotten the same thing for much much less, if a FS/OSS solution had been used.

    1. Re:irrelevant by pilybaby · · Score: 1

      Exactly. That's my point, go buy a support contract for free sw and reduce the military budget by a lot more than what you save on the sw. You can then spend all this extra cash you were wasting on more productive things for society, things that bring about real change and benifit for people.

  59. Could have helped the Canadian Military out by Lokist · · Score: 1

    Since US is pretty much joined with Canada at the hip they could have put a little of that wasted money into the Canadian Military... If a Country ever decided to attack Canada we might as well give up and start offering our attackers Tim Hortons Coffee... we might be good for peace keeping...but we have no defense...Missles coming over Canada from other countries would fly right by...I doubt we would even try and shoot them down.

  60. Now it's clear by Petronius · · Score: 0

    Love your country, support M$. Use Linux, be a terrorist. Time to write you Senator NOW!

    --
    there's no place like ~
  61. 200 million on Linux systems? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $200m on Linux systems? That seems a bit high, don't you think?

    1. Re:200 million on Linux systems? by mao+che+minh · · Score: 1
      I was kind of making a general estimate of the cost of the new systems, training, applications like Star Office, and the replacement of many of their Win2k and/or Windows NT 4.0 servers with Red Hat Enterprise (which is $2,500 a pop with the service contract). I would imagine that the US government would want to purchase Redhat - personal for sosme systems, professional for others - which would be less then half the cost of Windows.

      But yea, that total was just off the top of my head (as you can tell).

  62. Its 6 years folks. by mac123 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    $953/computer / 6 years = $158 per year.

    If this includes SQL, etc, all future releases, its likely a good deal as far as MS licensing costs go.

    1. Re:Its 6 years folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does each *DESKTOP* machine need SQL server?

  63. It's obvious what software... by mblase · · Score: 2, Funny

    They want all their recruits to train on the best computer simulation available to the government today.

  64. 471 Million Dollars for MS Products? by dfn5 · · Score: 1

    That sure is one expensive toilet seat.

    --
    -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
  65. That's not even half of it. by notque · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just wait until while in the middle of cordinating an attack, they recieve a windows messanger popup for increased penis size.

    Priceless!

    --
    http://use.perl.org
    1. Re:That's not even half of it. by Virtex · · Score: 1

      A message for increased penis size brings new meaning to the term windows messenger "popup". lol

      --
      For every post, there is an equal and opposite re-post.
    2. Re:That's not even half of it. by riceboy50 · · Score: 1

      All "they" would need to do is open up their process manager and change Windows Messenger to "Manual" instead of "Automatic" startup ;)

      --
      ~ I am logged on, therefore I am.
    3. Re:That's not even half of it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gives the blue screen of death new meaning...

    4. Re:That's not even half of it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the tip :)

  66. Symptom of too high a budget by James+Lewis · · Score: 1

    Unfortunantly it seems like whenever a group is getting government funding they feel like they have to spend ALL the money. If they don't spend it all whoever gave it to them isn't going to give them as much next time. I think that is what causes a lot of the senseless waste in government, and could be the culprit here as well.

  67. My tax dollars at work. by inepom01 · · Score: 1

    Isn't it great? 40% of my salary is going for Microsofot software! Awesome.

    1. Re:My tax dollars at work. by Dan-DAFC · · Score: 1

      40% of my salary is going for Microsofot software!

      You get paid $1.1775 billion?

      --
      Suck figs.
  68. Someone's gotta do it... by DragonMagic · · Score: 2, Funny

    "B S O D in the Army~~~"

    Sorry, someone had to. (yeah, the syllables don't match up...)

    --

    Human nature is the same everywhere; the modes only are different. -- Earl of Chesterfield
    1. Re:Someone's gotta do it... by bludstone · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was thinking something equally horrible.

      "Gives an entirely new meaning to 'blue screen of death'"

      Ughhhh.

      Well, at least weve solidly LOST the probably upcoming cyber-war.

      "US troops are coming in, but we found the command HQ's IP! Use this exploit. Okay."

      Meanwhile, on the battlefield.

      "sir? weve lost communications with HQ and our auto-targetting system wont boot properly."

      "Stay alert so.." *BOOM!*

      People are going to die because of this.

      --

      no .sig
    2. Re:Someone's gotta do it... by willjohnson · · Score: 1

      There was an article about a Navy ship having to be towed into port when its Windows server went BSOD.

      http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/july13/cov2 .h tm

  69. $Ching $ching!! by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1

    Someone has made a nice commission on this sale.

    Even ignoring OSS alternatives, the high unit price means a fat profit for a dealer somewhere.

    Bet you a dollar there is a slice of this going back to whoever OK'd the contract. Generals gotta pay for the servants too, y'know!

    (Actually, that is not true. One good thing about being a General is that you get all the slave labour you could want.)

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
  70. alternately... by ed.han · · Score: 4, Funny

    "what, you think they really paid $700 for a hammer?"--judd hirsh, independence day.

    1. Re:alternately... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh god that movie was terrible. quote it again and im gonna revoke YOUR slashdot card too

    2. Re:alternately... by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1

      What I love the part where something 1/4 the mass of the moon was in close orbit with no tidel effects..

      --
    3. Re:alternately... by Mage+Powers · · Score: 1

      I thought it was toilets...

    4. Re:alternately... by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      Yes.. that would have worked wonderfully into the "plot"...

      Death! Devastation! and THE TIDE IS UP A FEW FEET!.... RUN!!!

    5. Re:alternately... by Cybrr · · Score: 1

      You'd almost think they could negate gravity or something...

      *Wonders if this post would be considered funnier if I added "oh wait."*

      --
      Why did GEAR crush RDP?
    6. Re:alternately... by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Or think about Microsoft's shift to safe computing and the government's need to access secured data. One hand washes the other, I say.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
  71. Speculation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you rocket scientists even know that $$ is for an OS or any existing Microsoft product. Maybe they're developing specific software for the Army.

    1. Re:Speculation... by Rasputin · · Score: 1
      How do you rocket scientists even know that $$ is for an OS or any existing Microsoft product. Maybe they're developing specific software for the Army.

      Because that's how Microsoft does business. They use a sale of one piece of software to leverage the sale of another. Further, everything they sell leverages OS purchases. You can't just go out and buy a word processor from them, you have to buy Windows as well. It's much like the joke about rabbits (how you never have just two) - you can never buy just one Microsoft product.

      If they are developing new software for the Army, then you can bet cash that it will only run on a Microsoft OS.

      --
      "I once preached peaceful coexistence with Windows. You may laugh at my expense - I deserve it." Be's Jean-Louis Gass
  72. Re:Keeps the money local, I suppose. by caluml · · Score: 1

    So that company called Microsoft doesn't improve the wealth of the nation? Wow. And I thought that flood of money coming in from around the world might seep into the US economy some how.
    You're going to tell me that Microsoft keeps all its money in Swiss bank accounts now too, and only employees people from China.

  73. A lot of the cost is for a special Plus Pack… by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    â¦for the Army that features a 3D minesweeper and special screen saver that displays over-priced toilet seats.

  74. You can hear the laughs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the way across the pacific..

    China is probably laughing thier ass off right now.. I can imagine north korea is doin the same..

    Being as china is moving toward their very own linux, and it's most likely pretty secure at that.. how many coders will it take to crash the US armed forces.. few highschool kids tops.. woohoo..

    I wonder what kinda deal norton antivirus is getting from the military next week? Time to buy some symantec stock!

  75. Battle of the Consoles by vasqzr · · Score: 1



    The US Army and their Xbox's vs Saddam and his PS2's

    This gives a whole new meaning to console wars.

  76. wow government waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This must be a slow news day, huh?

    Who should they be buying their computers from? Apple? Oh wait that would make them PANDERING TO A CORPORATE INTEREST.

    Wake up idiots. The US govt buys things from business like everyone else. They just do it 100x as bad as a typical consumer.

  77. Irony by geekmetal · · Score: 0

    Fighting the enemy outside and embracing the one inside?

    --
    There are two kinds of egotists: 1) Those who admit it 2) The rest of us
  78. Re:uh oh = big ass faggot by caluml · · Score: 1

    Hehe - I'm enjoying this soap opera - keep it coming ;)

  79. It's not all licenses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When a large entity pays that much for software, it's not so much paying for the software itself, it's the support that comes with it. I know everyone's going to crack on MS support, but when it comes to the government, or other very large contracts like this, they will have MS at their beck and call. If something breaks, it WILL be fixed, in a very short amount of time. That's why the goverment goes with commercial products, rather than open source or limited distrobution products.

  80. Uh oh.. It, uh, crashed.. by Lysol · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Keith Hodson, a Microsoft spokesman, said the contract could help the Army reduce its costs and "validates the Army's belief in our security model."

    I can't wait to see this. I'm not sure if the Army will be significant enough pressure to make m$ security better. In fact, they're a small piece in the bigger pie.

    While this is probably cheaper than the defense departments $300 toilet seat vendors (hey, they probably at least had a backup toilet seat tho), it doesn't make too much sense to me. I'm reminded of the Navy vessel that crashed running NT.

    Given that XP is still having issues with updates and such, I'm wondering what the Army was thinking. But then again, that is often the case..

    1. Re:Uh oh.. It, uh, crashed.. by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      That $300 was a "BUDGET" for a toilet seat, and included the possible cost of procurement, eg the worst case scenario to pay a guy to not do his job for a day in any part of the world, and instead find a toilet seat.

      We don't have to worry about this kind of shit, because we are never under heavy fire from the enemy in a strange country when we go to the wally mart.

      Something to think on before you complain about the military is the ramifications of any failure due to underbidding. A shoddily made F16 is worse than no F16 at all, because a failure means one less trained pilot, one less machine capable of flying a sortie in a trouble zone. Sure, sometimes it seems like a Joseph Heller novel, but that's war for you.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  81. not my army, but... by geoff+lane · · Score: 1

    ...$471M is an awful lot of money for a few CDs.

    Perhaps someone should ask their congress-critter to find out if this contact went to public tender and if not, why not?

  82. And they privatization saves money?! by release7 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    For 471 large, the DoD could directly hire the most brilliant software minds in the country to create their own operating system and office suite and any other necessary software. What's more, the OS could be released into the public domain and made freely available to the public (perhaps without any classified code).

    Instead, the DoD is at the mercy of some large corporation, obligated to spend 1/2 billion in a few years to patch all the bugs.

    What a waste.

    --

    <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

    1. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't that be a problem with government competing in the private sector? It sounds good to me but I think there are some legal problems

    2. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 1

      For 471 large, the DoD could directly hire the most brilliant software minds in the country to create their own operating system and office suite and any other necessary software.

      Well, yes, but so could GE and various other private sector folks, but they don't, so what makes you think the Army would be any smarter?

      Really, just about any of the Forbes 100 corps could figure out which open source project was close enough to their needs (OpenOffice, etc), say "I need this-this-this added, who do I write a check to to get it done?", have the updated code in however many months, and tell Microsoft to take a flying leap. Especially now that there's lots of coders in need of employment. It'd be worth it just to get rid of the legal liability from closed source licensing.

    3. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For 471 large, the DoD could directly hire the most brilliant software minds in the country to create their own operating system and office suite and any other necessary software."

      OK so now you have to host development teams and pay them money. Stop your new purchases and wait for the new OS. Training will have to be done etc.

      Come on this is lame and it gets modded insightful. Forget the new to Slashdot bit this is just lame. I mean it's even worse than the they should have used Linux guys because this guy wants to start from scratch reinventing the wheel AGAIN.

      "What's more, the OS could be released into the public domain and made freely available to the public (perhaps without any classified code)."

      See above. .."perhaps without any classified code" yes code like booting the system or their office suite. Does this guy not get that this contract covers desktop office systems and not weapon systems?

      "Instead, the DoD is at the mercy of some large corporation, obligated to spend 1/2 billion in a few years to patch all the bugs."

      Why do you think they in the words of our illustrious slash editor (sic) "paid twice." Oh yes because they are stupid.

      Not

      They have a firm to blame AND hold accountable that is dedicated to serving them.

      These knee jerk reactions are oldhat. Grow a bit between the ears and move on.

      --
      Why post AC?
      Because I will not be numbered.
      -----

    4. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by ratamacue · · Score: 1

      You know what would really save money? Limiting the size of government in the first place. It's really disturbing that nobody questions WHY government needs to take this much money from the people in the first place; they only squabble over where the money goes.

      Everyone wants a piece of the pie, they say. Well, I say instead of baking more pie, we need to eliminate the pie.

    5. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      Goddamnit...you must never have programmed anything in your life. Do you honestly think that any organization in the WORLD can create, in 6 years for any amount of money, an operating system, SQL server and office suite as feature rich and bug free as MS' tools available today? Yes, I said bug free. Sure, MS still has bugs, but the thing doesn't crash or leak memory like it did in 1996, or even like it did in 1999.

      Good software takes time. Linux is at least 10 years old, and has only been useful to the public for the past 4 or 5. Shit, open office is 4 years old at this point.

      Keep in mind, also, that whatever solution the Army chooses would have to perfectly and seemlessly interoperate with what they have now.

      So instead of spending $470mil to use software that's good enough now, you want them to spend it on writing new stuff, and ostensibly using NOTHING now?

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    6. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by release7 · · Score: 1

      I'm not aware of any law that states "the government must place all work out to bid." That would mean the DPW in your community wouldn't be able fix potholes. Of course, there is the unwritten law that says "Washington must line the pockets of insiders." I don't know how to get around that one.

      --

      <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

    7. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by Politburo · · Score: 1

      1. The DoD isnt a software company
      2. The DoD is a gigantic bureaucracy. It would take at least 10 years to do what you describe. By buying from a corporation, they can have it tomorrow.
      3. If DoD took all the time to do this, they would probably not release it public. It's possible they would release a binary of it, but not a chance for source.
      4. Why reinvent the wheel? I'm not saying Windows is the greatest thing ever, but there are plenty of OSes, and DoD doesn't need to add their own.

    8. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by release7 · · Score: 1
      First, your assertion that I proposed that they start from scratch is wrong. I said it would be possible with that kind of money, to write the code from the bottom up and get very talented software programmer to boot. You could pay them all extremely for quite a long time. Plus, if you consider that this wouldn't just spare the Army's budget, but the entire federal government, the cost savings would be considerable indeed.

      As far as yur "classified code" comment. I would quite expect that the OS would carry some heavy duty, military encryption components. Enough said on this point.

      As far as "paying twice," this is subscription software the government is getting. They will be obligated to pony up again in a few years to keep the license. If that's not paying twice, I don't know what is.

      As far as responsibility goes, NASA, although very privatized, is extremely accountable to Congress and the Executive Branch. As we saw with the recent shuttle disaster, the agency is coming under intense public scrutiny and change there is likely.

      It is you who is being kneejerk. Take time to think things through.

      --

      <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

    9. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by nomadicGeek · · Score: 1

      Where to start...

      There are definitely problems with using COTS technology but the govt tried what you are talking about for a long time. Then someone realized that they were spending a fortune to reinvent the wheel when superior technology was often available for far less.

      Do you really think that the govt should be in the business of putting private companies out of business? What happens when they take your tax dollars to produce a product that competes with your company's products and then give it away? I guess you can go work for the govt.

      The marketplace produces pretty intense competition. Bright and ambitious people work their butts off trying to improve products, reduce design time, and decrease costs because they might strike it big. Products and techiniques progress at an insanely fast pace. I don't ever see that happening in govt.

      Since when can the govt only hire the best and brightest. Have you dealt with govt hiring policies lately. It pretty much guarantees that for every bright person, you will get dozens of meatheads. You can never fire these meatheads. They are there to gum up the works forever.

      I can see it now. The new IT project is behind schedule and over budget. Originally projected to cost $471k, the costs have soared to $2.4 billion with no end in sight. The project will be finished 3 years late. Now that sounds like a govt project.

    10. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by release7 · · Score: 1
      Where to begin...

      I'm not aware of any government project to create an open source operating system or office suite for the public. If you've heard of it, I'm all ears.

      OS and office suites are NOT cutting edge technologies. Nobody is making the space shuttle here (hmmm...isn't that a project run by the government). Maintaining them would be far cheaper that buying a never-ending Microsoft license. And if you need to overhaul it every once in a while, big deal.

      So you think there is a lot of competition for operating sytems and office suites created by the "free" market? Geez, have you looked at the market penetration stats for these two products?

      I don't know why you are so down on government projects. There is waste in any endeavor, public and private. There are slug workers at MS, there are slug workers in government. Can you point me to one legitimate study that shows private companies are more productive? Or are just spouting rhetoric that you heard on some talk radio program?

      --

      <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

    11. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by jault · · Score: 1

      Maybe the Army wants to spend the next 6 years USING their computers, instead of spending that time re-inventing the wheel.

    12. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by release7 · · Score: 1

      Are buying software and writing software mutually exclusive operations that must be done serially? I don't think so. I can buy a temporary solution today and lay the ground for a permananent improvement at the same time.

      --

      <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

    13. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by kevjava · · Score: 1

      Why reinvent the wheel?

      Government budgets generally run from one year to the next, and it takes at least ten mother-may-i's up the chain of command to spend a dime of Uncle Sam's money.

      Windows is good enough, it's made a lot of progress in the last few years. DoD is huge on standards... everyone should run the same things, everyone runs Windows, Word, Excel, yada yada, so we don't run into issues like compatibility... it takes one more node out of the fault tree.

      The DoD has just now started opening their eyes to Linux, and I don't think they're ready to retrain everyone on an OS that most soldiers are completely lost at... I think that's a pretty decent deal, if you ask me.

      And, by the way, XP has been approved by the DoD for most uses on their networks. :)

    14. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by release7 · · Score: 1

      If you're smart, you can continue to pay rent to your landlord while you save for the new home that will be YOURS and yours alone. No one says you need to be homeless before you get a home.

      --

      <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

    15. Re:And they privatization saves money?! by nomadicGeek · · Score: 1

      The posting that I was responding to...

      For 471 large, the DoD could directly hire the most brilliant software minds in the country to create their own operating system and office suite and any other necessary software. What's more, the OS could be released into the public domain and made freely available to the public (perhaps without any classified code).
      Instead, the DoD is at the mercy of some large corporation, obligated to spend 1/2 billion in a few years to patch all the bugs.


      That would be the OS that I was referring to. Purely hypothetical.

      The comments come from experience working for govt agencies as an employee and as a private contractor as well as working in private industry. Yes, there is waste in any endeavor but govt institutions stand in a league of their own. Ever try to hire the person you want into a govt position? You can't get there from here. Ever try to buy exactly what you need? You can't get there from here. Everything is a hassle and nobody is directly accountable. Overruns of time and budget are commonplace. In private companies these things tend to force a correction as they start to affect the bottom line. In govt they just borrow more and/or raise taxes.

      I think that most people who have worked in both sectors would tend to agree but like most things, there will also be many who disagree.

      There are some things that the government must do because they can't be left to private enterprise, like defense of the nation. Those things should be chosen carefully though. I guess the main thing that I objected to was the suggestion that the DOD develop the software and then make it freely available. It sounds good on the surface but I think that the govt taking taxpayer money and then using it to compete with private enterprise is even worse than Microsoft using its stranglehold on the desktop to shoehorn other software into the marketplace.

      I disagree that there is no competition. Sun, IBM, Oracle, SAP, the entire open software movement, and many talented others are all gunning for a piece of the pie. Competition is fierce. MS has only had its position of power for about 5 years now. They constantly try to innovate (of course you can argue this point) and use every advantage that they can muster like their dominance on the desktop. If there was no competition, they would be able to sit there with Office 95 and just keep charging for it. As soon as they slack off, they'll suffer just as Lotus, IBM, Novell, and many others have in the past.

      I can't point to a study that says that private enterprise is more productive than govt. I'll look around though. I'm sure that one is out there.

      Thanks for your comments.

  83. Better to overpay than be sorry... by LostCluster · · Score: 1

    Has anybody thought how complicated it'd be if Microsoft wanted to to audit the Army's compliance?

  84. Buying windows twice is the norm. by gukin · · Score: 1

    I don't know any company (other than small businesses) who don't do their bulk shopping through general (crappy) vendors. My company has been using HP for years, they're "standardized", just because one will have a FIC motherboard and the next will have an MSI mother etc. etc. etc.

    Then there is the "site license" thing which cuts down on system administration but implies that two licenses are being purchased for every machine.

    What has bugged me in the past is when I needed a linux machine, we HAD to purchase the crappy HP AND just tossed the M$ license out the window. Fortunately the machine had one of those pretty license stickers on the side so WHEN the BSA comes, we can say "See, it has a license, it's not running windows but it has a license. Can we get away with just paying $10,000 for the violation?"

    Whee.

  85. What Microsoft gets in return by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1

    (AP) "In addition to the payment, Microsoft is expected to get exclusive usage rights to several Borg cube prototypes currently being constructed by Army personnel"

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  86. New programming language... by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I guess there's an Ada# around the corner, now that M$ has a foot in the army. C# meets Schwarzkopf... surely a macho language!

  87. Re:494000 computers - One per soldier. by stevesliva · · Score: 3, Informative

    About one computer per soldier, since total personnel in 4/2002 was 481,266. Given the typical astronomical support to combat troop ratio, that's not huge at all.

    --
    Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
  88. Army of One... by Dr.+Bent · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...reboot per day. At least the rifles aren't running Windows yet.

    1. Re:Army of One... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not? I thought they were running Pocket Rifle 2003

      -Cygnus

    2. Re:Army of One... by a1englishman · · Score: 1

      Windows for Rifles: So you can truely shoot yourself in the foot

    3. Re:Army of One... by mofochickamo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I get your joke (and think it is funny) but in fairness to Microsoft neither NT 4.0 nor XP need to be rebooted once per day. In fact, I used to run NT 4.0 at work and the only times I had to reboot was when I installed software (but not because the system became unstable... well, maybe 3 times over 2 years I got the BSOD). I now run XP and it is also very stable (only got the BSOD immediately after I installed a driver that the OS warned me about).

      However, now that I think about it, maybe Microsoft releases their updates at specific intervals to try and force a reboot at least every couple of weeks without making it look like the system is unstable... hmmmm, hand't thought of that.

      Anyways, don't hate on me, I also run Linux, I mean GNU/Linux (I make RMS proud), at work and at home. Also, I don't think this was a wise move for the Army. Like others have said, they coulda contributed a hell of a lot of funding to OSS. They could have just opened up their own shop and hired some great OSS people to work fulltime on their own projects. Oh well, would have been nice.

      --
      Honk if you're horny.
    4. Re:Army of One... by machine+of+god · · Score: 1

      Yeesss.. Yet. My plans for world domination are coming along quite nicely, don't you think?

    5. Re:Army of One... by pimpinmonk · · Score: 1
      Army of One... ...reboot per day. At least the rifles aren't running Windows yet.
      So THAT'S what went wrong during the civil war!!!
    6. Re:Army of One... by rzbx · · Score: 1

      Your lucky. I got my laptop about 2 weeks ago. It has XP preinstalled. It crashed at least 3 times since I got it.

      --
      Question everything.
    7. Re:Army of One... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you using it for?

    8. Re:Army of One... by waspleg · · Score: 1

      my xp pro desktop crashes at least once a day, mostly while playing ET and ripping an internet stream to mp3 while i listen to it

      i get the exactly same lock up while playing halflife/CS occasionally

      basically teh video freezes and the last sound playing repeats in an endless loop til it's shut off the hard way (power off)

      i wish it would just crash a program waiting through a fs check every time is annoying (and even mroe so ify ou choose not to cause it comes back)

    9. Re:Army of One... by JohnyDog · · Score: 1

      At least the rifles aren't running Windows yet.

      Oh ya ? OICW

      Ok, that thing doesn't actually run win CE. Yet. But i now understand why is goverment so afraid of hackers. Ping flood, anyone ?

      --
      People who like this sort of sig will find this the sort of sig they like.
    10. Re:Army of One... by VidarJMD · · Score: 1

      That sounds exactly like the same problem I had with the looping sound. Turns out it was always related to the video card not being cooled enough. I took off the side of the case and put a window fan next to it. The machine never crashed. It would explain why it only happened during intense 3D applications like games.

    11. Re:Army of One... by waspleg · · Score: 1

      what kind of card do you have? i have a pos gf4 mmx 440.. it was a "gift"

    12. Re:Army of One... by VidarJMD · · Score: 1

      I think it was a Number9 SR9 8MB something based on the Savage4 chipset. It came with my dad's IBM but it had definite overheating problems. Might want to try out the fan thing to see if it helps and then get something from a cooling company like cardcooler.com if it works.

    13. Re:Army of One... by rzbx · · Score: 1

      Web surfing, writing, basic application usage, and some gaming.
      I've done much more intensive stuff with Linux and had no problems with the applications crashing the OS.

      --
      Question everything.
  89. Re:Thanks ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean the Pentagon.

  90. Intersting scenario: by floydman · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Officer: Sarg, launch the damn missile son, nuke their ass....

    Sarg: Duuh, do we have to restart after each missile Sir

    Officer: You didnt restart the last time??????

    Sarg: Duhhh,Naaah sir i didnt...It says abort retry ignore, duuuuh which one Sir....

    KABOOOOMMMMMMM.

    --
    The lunatic is in my head
  91. So... by Cackmobile · · Score: 0, Redundant

    next slammer virus stops the US army dead on its way to Tehran.

    --
    -- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
  92. Its cant be just a software deal! by kalki · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is cant be just a software deal. The Army has to replace the existing (i'm assumption) 490,000 desktop hardware if any Microsoft's lastest (or the next three year version)software has to run on it.

    if its a Hardware deal as well, where is the Headlines on DELL/IBM/HP bagging multi million dollar Army deal!

  93. Just shows that once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Again Linux is not ready for the desktop. If your average 'grunt' can't be expected to use it neither can the rest of population.

    Also the TCO comes into question. You would need to retrain thousands of troops in an army that it is already overstretched by defending the free world.

  94. Who's paying? by theolein · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why, you are silly. Indirectly you pay for this with your taxes. You are supporting a huge corporation that truly has no need of government handouts.

    Congratulations.

    1. Re:Who's paying? by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Why, you are silly. Indirectly you pay for this with your taxes. You are supporting a huge corporation that truly has no need of government handouts.


      No I'm not you're paying, I'm Canadian, my government won't even shell out to replace thirty year old helicopters.
      Heck I remember watching a movie a few years ago showing the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan a couple decades ago and one shot showed the Afgans fighting a Soviet tank with some ancient gun, our teacher then explained that that gun was the official anti-tank gun for the Canadian military... Needless to say I'm proud to say that our government won't be giving M$ 1/2 Billion dollars anytime soon!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    2. Re:Who's paying? by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      Your govt gives you silly things like health care, clean streets, low crime and free education.

      Our govt gives us shiny new tanks and airplanes and lots and lots of missles to kill muslims with.

      So there!.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

  95. New attacking front by EdMack · · Score: 5, Funny

    In related news, the US has dropped millions of computers off to terrorist hot-spots.
    Military Analyists estimate Bin Laden will be bankrupted by the additional fees within 3 years.

    --
    puts ("Python r0cks\n");
    1. Re:New attacking front by davechen · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey, if there's anyone that can find Bin Laden and bring him to justice, it's the BSA.

  96. Another loss for OSS penetration by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    From what i remember the army was looking into and to some extent using OSS.

    I wonder what effect the SCO mess had on this decision, if any.

    Either way its another setback. Every large purchase of commercial ( regardless of whos ) software ties up that entity with the software for a while, until its depreciated out..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  97. yep by gobblez · · Score: 1

    i'm in the army. much of our computers are still running windows NT and crashes constantly. only within the last year or so i've started seeing some Dell computers with Windows 2000 and XP in a few Army offices. flat panel monitors are popping up a lot too.

    so getting new hardware, OS's and Office Software is a good thing. yes we probably are paying twice as much or more than we need to, but thats normal and expected, and it's your tax money anyways. it's something that needs to be done, yes it can be done better, but at least it's happening. and for the linux people, we probably don't use it because of it's complexity, and the fact that they don't teach us it, and the fact that many people in the military are there cause they couldn't make it in the real world, therefore not being bright enough to learn it. and not to mention the old higher ranking people who make the decisions, they definately don't care to learn linux.

  98. Contracted out anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    They are just going to contract out people to work on their computers anyway, so it's not like the actual troops are going to be doing much work on them.

    I am contracted out to the Air Force to convert one of their COBOL systems to Java. Sure, they allocate blue-suits to program, but the contractors are doing all the work. The airmen mostly sit and read online comics all day and talk about their fast-and-furious cars.

    And they pay my company a pretty penny for me to write their software. Around $115/hour to be more precise. It only takes about 25% of that to cover my salary. There's where your tax $$ are going.

    And there's a good chance this project won't even deploy. Stupid.

  99. Re:uh oh = big ass faggot by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

    tomstdenis = Pr0nboy, maybe?

    Of course, Pr0nboy has been posting as AC, but I have ways of knowing...

  100. Well goodbye and thanks for all the POSIX! by steve_of_AR · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, that's great. (1) Government requires purchased OS's to adhere to new set of standards called POSIX. (2) UNIX vendors jump through hoops for a decade or more to develop and meet the standards. (3) Government buys MS instead.

    1. Re:Well goodbye and thanks for all the POSIX! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NT is POSIX compliant.

    2. Re:Well goodbye and thanks for all the POSIX! by steve_of_AR · · Score: 1

      Well not really, MS claimed POSIX compliance when the standard was so young that it didn't mean much (no fork() call for example). Unless you're talking about the newer POSIX emulation layer (which is extra cost I think (?)) that most code doesn't use (none of the mentioned software uses the posix emulation). The point of the government's POSIX requirement was that the *software* that was written for these systems would be *portable* so the government wouldn't be tied to a particular vendor, whereas it looks to me like they are going to be using Win32 software on these systems.

    3. Re:Well goodbye and thanks for all the POSIX! by steve_of_AR · · Score: 1

      > NT is POSIX compliant

      It's an interesting point that is brought up often.
      Here's a tidbit from
      http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.as p?url= /library/en-us/vccore98/html/_core_port_from_unix_ to_win32.asp

      "The first option UNIX programmers look at is the Windows NT POSIX subsystem. However, it only supports POSIX 1003.1, which was the only POSIX version standardized when Windows NT was created. Since then, there has been little demand for extending this subsystem, because most applications have been converted to Win32. The 1003.1 system is of limited interest for fully featured applications, because it does not include many capabilities (such as those in 1003.2, network support, and so on). Full featured applications run under the Windows NT POSIX subsystem do not have access to Windows NT features available to Win32 applications, such as memory-mapped files, networking, and graphics."

    4. Re:Well goodbye and thanks for all the POSIX! by catalina · · Score: 1

      NT is POSIX compliant.

      And the COE security guidelines recommended that the POSIX compliance be turned off....

      And the POSIX compliance went away for W2K.

      Not to mention that although Unix systems are required to be POSIX-compliant, there seems to be no insistence that applications be written toward POSIX-compliance.........

    5. Re:Well goodbye and thanks for all the POSIX! by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "And the POSIX compliance went away for W2K."

      Not according to my MS documentation it isn't...

  101. Not necessarily paying twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because they have a deal with PC vendors that sell hardware with the software pre-installed, doesn't mean they're paying twice for it. An organization as a large as the military will probably have an EA in place. Under these EA-type agreements, said orgainization can designate one or more companies as its EA license provider. Dell, CDW, and others mentioned in the article are all certified Microsoft resellers. The software "sold" to the customer from these hardware vendor is then licensed under the purchaser's EA. QED

  102. Result of an Audit? by dsmoses · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wonder if this may be somehow tied to an audit. I remember reading articles a couple year ago regarding Microsoft auditing companies and strong-arming them to buy more licenses to cover the accountability.

    For 494,000 computers, I doubt the Army was able to keep track of every single on of its licenses. This may be a convenient way for both sides to look good. Army "consolidates" its IT purchasing, and MS gets a large government press release.

  103. This makes no sense! by teamhasnoi · · Score: 3, Funny

    For that kind of money, they could have bought a new G5!

    1. Re:This makes no sense! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They would..if the cost was 470,999,999..

    2. Re:This makes no sense! by isorox · · Score: 1

      Dont be so condescending, they arent that expensive. They could have bought 2!!

    3. Re:This makes no sense! by burns210 · · Score: 1

      don't laugh, a mac wouldn't have been a bad idea for the Army. Want an easy GUI for the non-techs to be able to use? double-check compared to windows. Want a unixy console for the l33t sysadmins? check. Want ms office? check.

  104. The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There using the cds for target practice, apparently the army thinks that well be better for combat if we use more expensive equiptment.

  105. Re:Paying twice? -MAYBE by Havokmon · · Score: 1
    RTFA and I saw NO reference to anyone paying twice.

    It's inferred. The FCW article said that some PC's would be purchsed from Dell. So it's assumed that these are going to be Dell's regular PC's that (At least at one point) were required to ship with a copy of Windows.

    I would say it's possible that Windows is paid for twice, but unlikely that Office will be.

    --
    "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
  106. US Army Signs $471,000,000 Deal by chiseltip · · Score: 1

    It's good to see the Govenment spending money to spur the economy!

  107. Hmm soo.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All your base are belong to MS.

  108. macs in the desert by pcp_ip · · Score: 1
    The problem with computers in the Army is they are bought by the gross and not necessarily purchased to accomplish certain functions. The Army doles out laptops in the same way we dole out boots, tents or any other class of supply.

    Army's Apple Shines in the Desert

  109. How quickly we all forget... by gamgee5273 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We all do remember what happened to the USS Yorktown in 1998, yes?

    1. Re:How quickly we all forget... by sheldon · · Score: 2, Informative

      LOL! I can't believe Linux zealots still have this in their favorites list.

      "The source of the problem on the Yorktown was that bad data was fed into an application running on one of the 16 computers on the LAN."

      The issue was quite clearly with a custom application written by the vendor.

      The only people claiming this was the fault of NT are the clueless Unix wannabes who were upset that they lost a contract. I can't believe anybody is still fucking stupid enough to believe these claims when they've long since been discredited.

    2. Re:How quickly we all forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how quickly it is forgotten the real story that it was user error.

    3. Re:How quickly we all forget... by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1
      Actually, I'm not a Linux zealot. In fact, I'm not currently running Linux on any of my machines.

      I am, however, a realist: The OS can crash on a desktop - that is understandable. BUT the OS should not fucking crash on a Naval vessel! Period! There is no excuse M$ can make - custom app or otherwise - for NT to have crashed on that boat.

      How is that Red(mond) Kool-Aid?

    4. Re:How quickly we all forget... by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If an application crashes and brings down your whole damn network, then the problem is not with the application it is with the OS.

      So the issue was quite clearly with the substandard OS.

    5. Re:How quickly we all forget... by jafuser · · Score: 1

      This could be true, but the major counterpoint to this is that a consumer-grade operating system will attract consumer-grade software development practices.

      Military grade operating systems will attract military-grade software practices.

      A mistake like this should never have been made in a military application. Using a consumer-grade operating system meant a much wider group of people to pick for the job, which means they were all the more likely to pick someone who wasn't completely competent to do a thorough design and review of the software.

      If they had chosen a more robust operating system, their choices for developers would have been a lot more limited, but the competence-per-developer factor would have been a LOT higher.

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    6. Re:How quickly we all forget... by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      If an application crashes and brings down your whole damn network, then the problem is not with the application it is with the OS.

      So the issue was quite clearly with the substandard OS.


      That's exactly right. Applications should not have the power to crash the Operating System.

      I run Linux on my desktop. During development, my software will often crash on a bug. This is part of software development.

      I've NEVER seen even the NASTIEST bugs I've ever seen in my software crash my Linux dev workstation. I've seen plenty that crash Win2000/XP/98.

      In years of using Linux, the only software situation that crashed it is trying to run Civ CTP twice on the same machine on different virtual desktops, and even then, only on Red Hat 6.2 when using a (long ago replaced) Nvidia TNT2 video card.

      Don't buy the horse puckey that an screwy application should be able to bring down the O/S. A well designed, multi-user operating system should have plenty of protection from that kind of stuff.

      XP/2000 is NOT multi-user. You can still only be logged in once at any given time! On my Linux systems, it's normal to be logged in 2, 3, 4, or more times at once on the same machine as different users.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    7. Re:How quickly we all forget... by sheldon · · Score: 1

      If an application crashes and brings down your whole damn network, then the problem is not with the application it is with the OS.

      Uh huh.

      You're obviously one of these lusers who claim "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.

      Repeat after me... "The OS did not crash... The custom application did"

    8. Re:How quickly we all forget... by sheldon · · Score: 1

      I am, however, a realist: The OS can crash on a desktop - that is understandable. BUT the OS should not fucking crash on a Naval vessel! Period!

      Your not a realist, you're a moron who clearly doesn't understand computer system design or troubleshooting.

      The description of the problem was stated as a Zero entered into a database field. Divide-By-Zero errors do not cause Operating Systems to crash, however if not handled as an exception they will cause an Application to crash.

      A ship automation system is obviously going to continue to read parameters out of the database and act upon them, such that if it does crash and is restarted it will crash again due to the error resulting from the bad data.

      I mean this was blatantly obvious back in 1998 when this article came out. It's blatantly obvious today. Anybody who has spent any amount of time troubleshooting applications will understand exactly the circumstances that likely resulted.

      How is that Red(mond) Kool-Aid?

      You should be asking yourself for beliving this nonsensical trash.

    9. Re:How quickly we all forget... by sheldon · · Score: 1

      Don't buy the horse puckey that an screwy application should be able to bring down the O/S. A well designed, multi-user operating system should have plenty of protection from that kind of stuff.

      No, the horse puckey is the claim that the OS crashed when it was just the application layer.

      XP/2000 is NOT multi-user.

      Actually it is, always has been.

      You can still only be logged in once at any given time!

      That's not what multiuser means. Under NT multiple applications run under multiple user contexts. Some of those user contexts are interactive, some of those are not.

      Again, this is the problem. People who have little understanding of computing systems making conclusions based on enduser statements.

      Obviously you are also one of these lusers who claims "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.

    10. Re:How quickly we all forget... by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 1

      From the article:
      "The data contained a zero where it shouldn't have, and when the software attempted to divide by zero, a buffer overrun occurred -- crashing the entire network and causing the ship to lose control of its propulsion system."

      now read carefuly "crashing the entire network".

      Now are you saying that the network functionality was provided by a custom application and not by NT? Are you saying that the navy bought NT but did not use its network protocols, but instead developed a whole different network suite just for their 16 computer LAN?

      Oh, and i dont appreciate being called a loser no matter how you spell it. Hopefully someone will see your post and moderate you down accordingly.

    11. Re:How quickly we all forget... by sheldon · · Score: 1

      From the article:

      Did you read this article?

      "Human error, not Microsoft Windows NT, was the cause of a LAN failure aboard the Aegis cruiser USS Yorktown that left the Smart Ship dead in the water for nearly three hours last fall during maneuvers near Cape Charles, Va., Navy officials said."

      now read carefully "Human error, not Microsoft Windows NT"

      Now are you saying that the network functionality was provided by a custom application and not by NT?

      No I'm saying "The Internet is Down".

      It's an enduser description of the problem, it's not technical. They claim the network crashed, when all that happened was the custom software system running things crashed. As far as the enduser is concerned, it's not working, right?

      Oh, and i dont appreciate being called a loser no matter how you spell it.

      Then don't act like a luser and start engaging your brain.

      The fatal flaw in your argument is that you didn't use a enduser help desk call parser to read the description of the issue. This wasn't written up in a technical journal, it was written up in a government management policy journal.

      Again, stop claiming "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.

    12. Re:How quickly we all forget... by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1
      Yawn. The point is the ship didn't work. Usually that's a sign that something has gone wrong. Call me odd, but that might even be the point where you start troubleshooting.

      Have you ever seen an app crash on NT? I have. I used to supervise a lab of 200 workstations with the shit on it. And, damn, wouldn't you know it? An app crashes and 70% of the time the OS went down. Try as they might, the systems administrators could never get NT to work in the way all of you Redmond stormtroopers like to imagine. BSODs were a regular part of my and my staff's day.

      I may be a "moron," but at least I know what happens in the real world when MS fucks up (like it usually does), and I know that real work needs to be done to fix the shit.

      Enjoy your beverage.

    13. Re:How quickly we all forget... by sheldon · · Score: 1

      Yawn. The point is the ship didn't work. Usually that's a sign that something has gone wrong. Call me odd, but that might even be the point where you start troubleshooting.

      Well duh.

      But the point is, it was the custom software that failed. Trying to blame this on the OS is a bit of revisionist sour grapes.

      Have you ever seen an app crash on NT?

      Actually no. I've been working with NT for 8 years now. I've supported installations of several thousand machines, and for the past 5 years have worked in internal development at a company with about 5,000 desktops and 200 web/app servers. Have yet to see an application crash NT.

      I used to supervise a lab of 200 workstations with the shit on it

      Ohhhh, college experience! I used to admin Unix when I was in college. Crashed all the time, big old kernel panics. dump the memory to disk and sit there at the console prompt. Yessir, Unix must suck! Couldn't possibly have had anything to do with students corrupting the filesystem by flipping the power switches, nope... If Unix were a decent OS that would never have impacted it. Yep, that's right, I'm a moron too!

      I may be a "moron," but at least I know what happens in the real world when MS fucks up (like it usually does), and I know that real work needs to be done to fix the shit.

      Enjoy your Kool-Aid, and hopefully you aren't betting your career on these claims. If you are, the welfare line starts two doors down the left hallway.

    14. Re:How quickly we all forget... by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1
      Double yawn. You certainly are the big man, aren't you, "Sheldon?" Might as well pull out the yard stick and pull down our pants, cause you just ain't gonna give up till you prove you're bigger, are you?

      All I know is that MS is good for the tech support business: as long as MS exists and keeps putting out crappy software and users like you lap it up, I'll have a job bailing your asses out of the fixes you get yourself into.

      Be seeing you, Sheldon. Enjoy the new Win2K Service Pack. Hopefully this one comes with pre-sweetened Kool-Aid, but I wouldn't be surprised if its the tyep that changes colors and flavors on you later on down the line.

    15. Re:How quickly we all forget... by sheldon · · Score: 1

      Well I keep hoping you will admit you are wrong and apologize, but instead all you seem to do is throw insults when confronted by the facts.

      Very sad...

    16. Re:How quickly we all forget... by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1
      I'm wrong and should apologize? Go look in the mirror, Sparkles. I'm right, I know I'm right, and I stand my ground when I'm right. I don't let Rush Limbaugh/Morton Downey, Jr.-like tactics shut me up. I make sure that all the facts and opinions are taken into consideration before a decision is made, unlike you and unlike our Army.

      Now here's a brainstorm: Maybe that's not Redmond Kool-Aid you're drinking after all. Maybe it's Dubya-flavored instead...

  110. Taxes by theolein · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I just made a post on you paying for this with your taxes, and now realise that the biggest, by far the biggest iraony in this "deal" is that Microsoft gets tax breaks like there's no tomorrow.

    I read with humour, the angry pro MS crowd who regularly vent their anger here on /. about the bias here, because those very same people fail to see the irony in paying for this deal indirectly with their taxes, and this to a company that hasn't exactly been paying huge dollops of taxes on it's yearly multi billion income.

    If your country ever does collapse, it will be because you have a government that thinks it can generate money from thin air, very much like the horde of dotbomb failures did.

    1. Re:Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is this "iraony" you speak of? Nothing you mentioned contained an "incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result". This is exactly what we would expect..

    2. Re:Taxes by Politburo · · Score: 1

      The situation you talk about has nothing to do with MS. If DoD had contracted IBM for Linux services, IBM would also enjoy the same tax breaks that ALL CORPORATIONS recieve. You are combining two wholly separate issues, The gov't choosing MS, and the gov't paying a corporation half a billion. They need the software either way. (save me the linux is free argument)

    3. Re:Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummmm, of course the U.S. government thinks it can generate money from thin air. That's one of the functions of a government -- to generate the money. Naturally, they use a printing press to actually do it, but economically that's equivalent to pulling it from thin air.

      And by the way, it seems to be working too, otherwise the US dollar wouldn't be preferred by so many all across the world as a standard "international" currency.

    4. Re:Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > otherwise the US dollar wouldn't be preferred by so many all across the world as a standard "international" currency.

      a little quick on the draw there, pardner. Seems the dollar ain't doing so well of late......

  111. RUMMY Mania by underwmj · · Score: 1

    Well it is good to see that Rumsfeild is doing what he said he would do...save the Army from itself and save us taxpayers from the Army!

    --
    --"Life's a virgin, a bitch is too easy"--
  112. An Army of One, A License of 494,000 by jhampson · · Score: 0

    Perhaps the Army could get some Ad placement in Windows to offset the cost. "This Blue Screen of Death is brought to you by the US Army!"

    1. Re:An Army of One, A License of 494,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could at least change the color. "This olive-drab screen of death brought to you by the US Army!"

  113. Economic Aid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure that someone, somewhere will tout this incredible misappropriation of our hard-earned American tax dollas as another "economic stimulus package".

    1. Re:Economic Aid by Poofat · · Score: 1

      If you think this is an 'incredible misappropriation', then you haven't seen anything yet.

  114. "it's working out all-right"?! by Fefe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, it works so well that the glorious US army is attacking one weak country on the verge of self implosion after the other instead of going after someone who can defend himself, like, for example, uh, North Korea?

    I suggest you read this Wired article to see how well it works. They are using Microsoft Chat on the battlefield, for crying out loud! Yes, the one with the comic characters, where the staff seargant looks like a big breasted bimbo. Nothing inspired a feeling of technical superiority like that, if you ask me.

    At least the important systems run Linux.

    1. Re:"it's working out all-right"?! by cioxx · · Score: 1
      They are using Microsoft Chat on the battlefield, for crying out loud! Yes, the one with the comic characters, where the staff seargant looks like a big breasted bimbo.

      I just read that article, and let me be the first one to say

      WHAT THE FUCK????@#$!
  115. Going through a reseller? Hmmm.. by leeet · · Score: 1

    That sounds fishy. Will we find some accounting "issues" in a few years? Why would you buy $1/2 B via a reseller? There's something behind this. I think someone's getting a retirement plan setup...

    --
    -- Leeeter than leet
  116. reason to pay twice. by someonehasmyname · · Score: 0

    They're buying Windows from Micros~1 because the pre-loaded install of Windows could be tainted. The PC manufacturer or one of their employees could have loaded keystroke logging software, etc.

    It's a shame that the Army can't buy machines without Windows, and not pay Micros~1 twice, but there's no way MS would let that happen.

    It could be worse though... Imagine being one of the guys that needs to reinstall Win XP on 494,000 machines.

    --
    Common sense is not so common.
  117. It;s great by T40+Dude · · Score: 1

    that the tax dollars are put to efficient use.

  118. great post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent up

  119. Very revealing quote form former Softmart employee by release7 · · Score: 1
    I did a little research on Softmart, the company that landed this sweetheart deal. He says "I went to work for Softmart where I did my best to ensure that every single person in the US had at least two copies of Microsoft Office," in his bio found here: http://mail.sealicemanor.com/ken.htm

    --

    <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

  120. Michael can't play by the rules by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 0, Troll

    "The great things about this deal: the Army is going through a reseller, when clearly they have the purchasing power to buy direct; and most of the computers they purchase are normal consumer machines which will be purchased with Windows and Office already installed, so the Army will be paying twice for each machine."

    There, Michael, I just took your smart-assed thoughts about the story submission and posted them as a Comment in response to the story. Is that so hard? I mean, it's what us common folk have to do all the time if we have something to say about a story. We don't have the luxury of forcing everyone else to read our comments without the ability to mod them up or down.

    You're an ass and you continually abuse your article posting privileges. And since you also have unlimited mod points, I expect you'll abuse them too and mod me down for pointing your abuses out.

  121. Re:Keeps the money local, I suppose. by scenic · · Score: 1
    They keep a large portion of it... you don't get $50 billion cash reserves by spending the money... and if you don't spend the money, only a fractional amount makes it into the larger economy, and some variable percentage of that is going to be invested by the bank in US ventures.

    Look at the their cash balances. They spend a lot of it, no doubt, but software, especially the business Microsoft is in, is a high margin business... they do pretty well on each copy of Office and Windows they sell.

    As for the money Microsoft spends, they do lobby in other countries, offer discounts to foreign governments considering open source legislation. I wouldn't be surprised to see that they do redirect some of the cash they make out of the country.

    --

    politics, food, music, life: FatMixx

  122. Six Years? by wfrp01 · · Score: 1

    What does this 'six year' figure mean? Does it mean they will buy all the computers now, and MS will support them for six years? Or does it mean that they are committing to this platform for six years? I'd guess the later, since current MS licensing practice tends to compell upgrades.

    This practice basically amounts to selling vaporware. What will MS be putting on Army computers five years from now? Who knows? Nobody. Microsoft doesn't even know.

    Personally, I'm more than a little apprehensive about Microsoft's future plans. DRM everywhere, for example. Yippie, the Army will be generating buttloads of documents that they will never be able to use without indefinately continuing to license Microsoft software. Of all the organizations in the world, you'd think the US military would be a little more concerned about being so vulnerable.

    The army and Microsoft, together in perpetuity. Great.

    --

    --Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
  123. 89%? by BigBadBri · · Score: 1
    Nice margin - seems to me there was plenty of room for the Army to squeeze a little more value on this deal.

    --
    oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
  124. we've been seeing this coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the contact does include more then the OS. i believe it includes Office and SQL server. could also include Exchange server.

    yeah we've been trying to get linux going over here but they don't listen unless it's got a MS at the beginning of it. i'd bet you they'd switch to MS Linux. :)

  125. Okay, so I'm flying along in my F-16, by pecosdave · · Score: 0

    and I'm looking at my radar, oops BSOD. No prob, I'm a good pilot, I can fly this baby where it needs to go without radar, after all it's just a patrol, we're not attacking anything right now. Then I try to adjust my course, oops, I nearly forgot fly by wire, no cable and pulleys anymore, it's all fiber optic and pumped right through that blue screened computer. Hmm this is begining to look bad. Those MS reps assured the engineers that there was no reason to leave a reset button acessible to the cock pit, heck it would be dangerous if a pilot accidently hit the PC reset button in the heat of battle, so they chose not to leave me one. Time to radio for help. Oh yeah, voice encryption now, guess what encrypts my voice? Hmm, maybe if I can cut the power, damn, that panels in the back. I'm running out of options here, good thing the engines still running since the reaction was already started. Lets see, toggles, hmm, nope, I know what all of these do, none of them will cut power to the computer systems. Looks like I'm going to have to eject. *pulls canopy release*. Dammit! The canopy release is manual, but I'll be damned if they didn't make the actual seat ejection computer controlled, now I'm 12,000 feet up, traveling at 800MPH, freezing my balls off, and theirs nothing I can do about it! Thank you Microsoft, I'll show you where you can go today! Let's see, there's got to be some way out of this. I can't just jump, to fast, to high, and I'm not even sure if their's ocean under me anymore. Maybe I can get the chute off of the seat? Dammit, rivited on. Damn it's cold. Whats this? Blowing the canopy must have cut the power to the computer! Thank God the switch was broke, it's coming back up now! I'm saved, maybe I will be able to land this thing. *watches computer boot on Radar display* Looks at screen, push CTRL+ALT+DEL to log in. Dammit, how am I supposed to do that? Is there a keyboard up here? Damn it's cold. *try stick* Alright! The fly by wire program runs as a service! I didn't have to log in. Okay, it still says hit ctrl+alt+del, lets see, *lifts up console panel, finds a small cash register sized keyboard* BINGO! You know hard it is to hit CTRL+ALT+DEL at 800MPH FREEZING COLD? Good, username and domain already in, lets see, I don't know the password to this. Lets try a couple.

    gotohellbill, nope not that one
    armyofone, nope, that didn't work eaither
    militaryisminenow, hey what do you know? That was it.

    *Watches windows start through ice on screen*
    Damn, how much crap do they have in the start up group? Hey look, the radar program is beging to load, oh whats this loading behind it? MS ejection seat monitor?
    *pilot ejected from plane without warning*

    The pilot lands on a backwoods farm owned by a real old fashioned hillbilly who forces him to marry his buck toothed daughter at at shotgun wedding, he doesn't know for sure but he thinks that their pilot had to much fun with Daisy Mae. The F16 continues under it's own power until it crashes into the Chinese embassy in Canada. This of course starts a war between the Canadians and the Chinese, the Canadians figure out that we are responsible and finally convince the Chinese of the same. WW3 begins, the bloodiest war of all time. The pilot and Daisy Mae live happily ever after with a bunch of Mullet headed kids, they're so far back they don't even know about the war.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  126. They should have said the were considering linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    to get a bit of a discount...

  127. Kiss any chance of justice goodbye... by teamhasnoi · · Score: 0, Troll
    Now that the Army is so dependent on Windows, there will be no more noise made from the DOJ about monopoly. MS equals 'national security'.

    MS has made the leap to cherished company, like MacDonnell-Douglas. Even if Linux or OS X was to smash Windows on the desktop, MS won't go down. They will recieve 'maintenence contracts' to stay afloat, so that in times of need, production of Windows CDs can be ramped up for wartime.

    MS can now claim 'National Security' anytime there is call for opening up an API, or documentation on a Windows function.

    Am I being sarcastic, or amazingly phophetic?

    1. Re:Kiss any chance of justice goodbye... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Am I being sarcastic, or amazingly phophetic?

      C. An idiotic linux troll.

  128. Let start figuring out howto outsource politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats the next frontier of e-voting.. machines dont take bribes.. After all, what do they contribute? Lies, sweetheart deals for the ultra-rich and megacorporations like Enron, with our money. The US military budget is the biggest gravy train that ever existed. And it is loaded with pork..individual politicos pet projects, often ones that don't make sense from a common-sense viewpoint. (but which do help important politicians constituencies, or, fantasies of world domination) Like this recent mini-nuke deal, which was basically welfare for the weapons labs because we already have enough mini-nukes (I heard that we were making them till 1993) to last us several world wars over..IMO we don't need to make new ones for quite a while.. Or the 'missile defense' program.. trillions for a technology before it has been demonstrated that it even works. In fact, repeatedly, it has been demonstrated that it doesnt work. See http://www.fas.org. And now the right-wing goons at the American Enterprise Institute want to outlaw NGOs like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the ACLU! See http://www.presentdanger.org/commentary/2003/0306a ntingo.html No wonder Bush was so hot to get into office even when he lost by > 600,000 votes. Can't let that happen..he and his friends might have to get real jobs for once in their lives.. BTW, did you know that last year, Microsoft was one of the biggest contributors to the Republican party? Bend over, America!

  129. economics 101: time / value of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    and just exactly how long would it take for the DoD development to reach an equivalently insecure / buggy yet feature bloated state of quality comparable to the MS suite?

    1. Re:economics 101: time / value of money by release7 · · Score: 1

      So spend 15 years, spend 20. Who cares? How long did it take to build the road system that is still being tweaked and added to? At the end of the time, you'll have exactly what you need and you'll end up saving a bundle of money.

      --

      <a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>

  130. What's next, $20,000 toilet seats? by Sergeant+Beavis · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Oh wait, that's already been done.

    --
    There is nothing inherently safe about liberty. That's why so many people died protecting it.
  131. This is a good thing... by VendettaMF · · Score: 2, Funny

    Anything that reduces the US Military's finances, stability and general flexibility/readiness without actually spilling blood can only be good.

    --
    kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
  132. Public Information by Ween · · Score: 2, Informative

    Any person can request a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) on this bid. You can see what companies bid, how much each bid, as well as all the proposal documentation. Its all in public domain. Now the trick is to find the contract number or the contracting officer so that you can contact the proper person.

    --


    Tis better to be silent and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt --Abraham Lincoln
    1. Re:Public Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully this information is classified secret so FOIA cannot touch it.

  133. bye bye to the most powerful army in the world!!! by arkanoid · · Score: 1

    Finally someone has come to reason and find a way to destroy the most powerful army in the world: BY USING WINDOWS!!!!!!

    The only thing about that we won't have to worry anymore is that the US Army won't have time to take countermeassure attacks since they would be occupied restarting the servers and PC's because of Windows beautiful BOD Screens...

  134. Commandline by theolein · · Score: 1

    The green-screen applications of yesteryear were bulletproof compared to those run on PCs.

    I often ask myself how much productivity has been wasted in the computing world over the last one and a half decades by making software use GUI's that neither add anything to the usabilty of the software nor make it any more stable.

    1. Re:Commandline by Locutus · · Score: 1

      not to mention all those people now doing data entry at 1/4 the speed because they must move the mouse to select the correct field. Some GUI apps I've seen do implement field traversal corectly in the GUI but many don't.

      Then again, Microsoft doesn't get $$ for making your live easier or cheaper. It does it by making you THINK you need their product. This US ARMY sweetheart deal is a case in point. IMHO.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  135. Fuckin-A Buddy by JohnnySkidmarks · · Score: 0

    If they really wanted to, they could get 0 day deal from Kazaa.

    --

    I went to battle MC Escher but drew a blank

  136. This is false. The above statement was true by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 0, Troll
    Let's look at the summary:
    The Submitter: At roughly $950 per computer this clearly involves more than just the OS, although the article unfortunately doesn't provide details, and I was unable to find any references to this on the Microsoft website.
    Michael: ...and most of the computers they purchase are normal consumer machines which will be purchased with Windows and Office already installed, so the Army will be paying twice for each machine.

    Did Michael not even bother reading what was submitted? The cash isn't for the OS. So the army isn't paying twice for the OS. You may assume that part of the money is going towards the OS but since no details have been released, making that assumption is just slanting the story to fit your particular political view of the situation - which is not what a journalist should do in reporting news.

    --
    I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
  137. On the surface, it seems like a good deal. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1
    A first analysis reveals that it isn't a bad deal for the army financially speaking. As someone else pointed out, the deal includes Windows, Office, Exchange, and SQL Server. That's not bad considering retail prices.

    Could the army save a ton of money if they used OSS? Yes. But while the Army is in many ways like a business, it isn't a business. One disadvantage that the Army has is that it can't attract the necessary personnel within itself to maintain a large Linux network. This is a misconception, though. All the money that they saved could have been diverted to services and maintenance had they wished.

    Some people here have raised the spectre of cost, accountability, and reliability of maintenance. But how much will the Army pay for support of 400,000+ computers? As for accountability and reliability, I would think that a company like IBM is more than up to the challenge of maintaining this network.

    Security-wise we all know this might be disastrous. Not only is it going to be desktops but servers as well. Like I said, on the surface it seemed like a good deal.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    1. Re:On the surface, it seems like a good deal. by reverendslappy · · Score: 1

      It is a good deal. I seriously doubt these are net-new systems, but rather new systems replacing older Windows desktops. If that's the case, let's think of the cost of an enterprise-wide desktop OS (any other OS) migration project to the tune of 497,000 systems, including new infrastructure with swing assets, support staff training, end user training, and application redevelopment over a span likely much longer than 6 years.

      A first analysis reveals that it isn't a bad deal for the army financially speaking.

      That's right. And dig deeper, and it's a helluva great deal compared to the cost of a migration to a different OS at the desktop.

  138. Everybody buys through a reseller... by winkydink · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter how big you are, you buy MS software through a reseller. MS sets the discount level, but doesn't handle the actual sales.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

  139. Not sure about the Army but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to work as a contractor for the US Dept. of Energy, and the policy at the time was to try and buy as much PC crap through PC resellers, particularly "disadvantaged" (Small, Local, Minority/Woman owned) because the government has purchasing quotas for those types of businesses and since they buy a lot of PCs and PC software this is an easy way to do it. It wasn't an issue of having the purchasing power to buy directly from the manufacturer, as we clearly did have it.

  140. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other news...
    The canadian army made a deal with Apple worth 3,119USD to buy one OS X license and one G5.

  141. A soldier's perspective by Gregoyle · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before you get on the Army for not buying Linux or doing something Free, consider this.

    In my unit (B Co. 1/509th Abn.) we have I think 7 systems. They all run Windows 2000 and are connected to a network, through which we can access printers, other systems, and the Internet. You would be *amazed* at how many people come in a day with problems printing, getting the Internet to work, or just getting a certain program to run. You want infantrymen who at least have some familiarty with office and windows to try learning bash or mutt? It's all we can do to get all the systems functioning properly, with everyone remembering their passwords and able to get there damned email and print. If the Army mandated Linux, there would be a 4 week training program, after which chaos would ensue because 90% of the people still didn't understand it.

    Your talking about people who have trouble checking email. Asking infantrymen to run linux as part of their work would be ludicrous at this point.

    --

    "He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."

    1. Re:A soldier's perspective by Cheeze · · Score: 3, Insightful

      yeah, because linux doesn't have a native GUI you think it's use would be hard to understand? Someone that's been running linux any amount of time could setup a machine for you that would have a GUI with only buttons for office apps, internet, and mail. It would also have the added benefit of native remote monitoring and administration, both of which the military would gain benefit from.

      If the army mandated a free operating system, they could modify the operating system to only provide the services that the army NEEDs. The problems you described do not happen with a properly configured system. If the system is setup correctly, the end user would not have the ability to make changes that would require downtime to fix. You have been trained by the Windows crowd to just accept downtime and failures as part of normal operation.

      I would guess even someone in B. CO 1/509th Abn could figure out. No offence intended.

      --
      Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
    2. Re:A soldier's perspective by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      Why do they need to learn bash or mutt? All they need is to have someone setup icons for them on KDE or GNOME and have them click on it.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    3. Re:A soldier's perspective by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Interesting
      If the army mandated a free operating system, they could modify the operating system to only provide the services that the army NEEDs

      Modified by whom? Certified for DoD use by whom? As for "services ...the army needs", even the army can't tell you that, so they'd say "just make it do everything". Also, who's going to port all the lame crap software the army already has that runs under windows? What if some of it can't be ported?

      The problems you described do not happen with a properly configured system.

      People don't forget passwords or forget which printer is theirs in Linux? [scoff!]

      I would guess even someone in B. CO 1/509th Abn could figure out.

      Figure out isn't the problem. You say Linux can be made unbreakable. Nobody who's ever given anything to an 11B (infantryman) ever calls anything unbreakable. You can't depend upon something being robust to protect it, you have to have people available who can fix it when it breaks.

      No offence intended.

      None taken. Hooah.

      SGT DunMalg 3/187th MI Bde 101st ABN Div (Air Assault) (1987-1993)

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    4. Re:A soldier's perspective by Gregoyle · · Score: 1

      If the army mandated a free operating system, they could modify the operating system to only provide the services that the army NEEDs.

      Yes, they can also afford to license Windows code to do the same thing. However, the thing is that the Army doesn't want to have to modify things to fit its needs, nor should they waste resources toward that aim. They want something that works now that they can train their men to use with a minimum effort and cost.

      If the system is setup correctly, the end user would not have the ability to make changes that would require downtime to fix.

      Things break. They break in Windows, they break in Unix, they break in Linux. What happens when there is a power outage caused by a lightening strike which causes key system files to be corrupted? Should there have been a surge protector and/or UPS? Probably. Was there? No. Okay, now half my systems don't work and since no one at my unit level has any knowledge how to fix them I have to send the whole systems up to the next level and hope they can fix them. This happened to us a few weeks ago and the systems were able to be fixed by the guys at our unit, because they had a familiarty with the software and knew how to fix it. (Yes, I know a Journalling Filesystem would have fixed this problem before it started, too, but the point was an example of how things break despite a good design, not discussing the merits of ReiserFS or ext3.)

      You have been trained by the Windows crowd to just accept downtime and failures as part of normal operation.

      I would guess even someone in B. CO 1/509th Abn could figure out. No offence intended.


      Some "offence" taken. I've got plenty of experience supporting systems running Windows, Linux, AIX, Solaris, and OpenBSD among others; I still maintain that 1. Stuff Breaks, and 2. You need someone *here* and *now* who knows how to fix it. Not someone who gets sent down by the Dept. of the Army twice a month to check on things, but someone organic to the unit.

      --

      "He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."

    5. Re:A soldier's perspective by smallpaul · · Score: 1

      You want infantrymen who at least have some familiarty with office and windows to try learning bash or mutt?

      Why would a newbie doing word processing or email use bash or mutt? How about Open Office and Evolution?

    6. Re:A soldier's perspective by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I thought, the orignal post may have been from someone "in the know" when it comes to Army IT, but that person isn't "in the know" when it comes to mainstream Linux distros.

      --

      From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

    7. Re:A soldier's perspective by koll64 · · Score: 1

      for a half o billion of bucks you'll get the system which won't crash. and is point-n-click too.

      and needs only one guy per 1000 computers to make it run.

    8. Re:A soldier's perspective by Q+Who · · Score: 1

      A typical response from a geek who just doesn't know how stuff works in army...

      Lucky one...

      Dude, do you realize that the dumb secretary whores do courses to learn to use Office?

      And don't say that they will learn OpenOffice instead... Just don't.

    9. Re:A soldier's perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In an open operating system, you can design the user interface, and hide all of the complexity.

      Linux as a standard distribution *would* be a lot harder for computer illiterates to use. However, if you design a custom user interface, you can keep everything nice and simple, and hide all the advanced features from the user.

    10. Re:A soldier's perspective by SubtleNuance · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Oh, your a US Soldier, I should probably tell you: FUCK OFF BABY-KILLER!

    11. Re:A soldier's perspective by rzbx · · Score: 1

      "Modified by whom? Certified for DoD use by whom? As for "services ...the army needs", even the army can't tell you that, so they'd say "just make it do everything". Also, who's going to port all the lame crap software the army already has that runs under windows? What if some of it can't be ported?

      Your question can be applied to Microsofts software as well, so why ask it? The same people that certify any other software for DOD would do the same with OSS. "Just make it do everything" I'm sure is not what they say, and who says you can't do "everything" on OSS? Now about porting "lame" crap. It can be done. There is no "can't" in software porting. It is just a matter of difficulty, cost, time, legality, etc. In the long run, it would most likely benefit them greatly since they wouldn't be locked into the proprietary software.

      "People don't forget passwords or forget which printer is theirs in Linux?"

      So your stating this problem exists in Linux as well. So in other words, there wouldn't be a difference either way. It is easier to prevent problems on in the Linux OS then it is in Windows. Windows has this crazy ability to do what it feels is right. On Linux, what you set is what you get, unless you state otherwise. Windows is made to be easy to use and thus problems arise when it thinks it is doing the right thing no matter how contrary it is to what you want it to do. A properly configured Linux system will have no problems. Also, take into account the knowledge of a *nix admin over a MCSE admin.

      "Nobody who's ever given anything to an 11B (infantryman) ever calls anything unbreakable."

      Isn't this a hardware issue?

      --
      Question everything.
    12. Re:A soldier's perspective by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      You want infantrymen who at least have some familiarty with office and windows to try learning bash or mutt?

      That would be dumb, indeed. How about kde and kmail instead?

      If the Army mandated Linux, there would be a 4 week training program, after which chaos would ensue because 90% of the people still didn't understand it.

      That is highly unlikely. My mother could use Linux (kde, mozilla, etc) the first time she ever tried it.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    13. Re:A soldier's perspective by wfrp01 · · Score: 1

      Wha? People using Windows can't print, use the internet, or get programs to run. So therefore they should keep using Windows?!

      Your argument might make sense if everyone who had to print had to install and configure linux from scratch. Do these people who can't print install and configure Windows from scratch? Doubt it.

      Any sysadmin worth half a nickle could get either Windows or Linux to work better than what you're describing. I think the frustration you're feeling is misdirected. It's not your users who have problems, it's your sysadmin.

      Or is every infrantryman a sysadmin of one?

      --

      --Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
    14. Re:A soldier's perspective by iabervon · · Score: 1

      If you switched everyone over to Linux, using bash and mutt, you could put all the necessary instructions to do everything that people are doing under Windows on a 3x5 card next to the computer. I know, because I've got such a card for my mother to use my Linux box to read email.

    15. Re:A soldier's perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Aren't you also talking about people who operate million dollar pieces of equipment rangin from tanks to GPS to communication systems?

      Just train a drill sergeant


      ALL RIGHT YOU MAGGOTS


      This is you CLI, you will sleep with it, you will eat with it

    16. Re:A soldier's perspective by burns210 · · Score: 1

      "You want infantrymen who at least have some familiarty with office and windows to try learning bash or mutt?"

      Oh please! if you lock down and customize the installs as much as i would hope, mutt wouldn't even be installed, and bash would likely be hidden away. Do the majority of the personel know how to access a dos console in win2000? No? well then they shouldn't have trouble NOT knowing where the Konsole is.

    17. Re:A soldier's perspective by BeerNut183 · · Score: 1

      So the infantrymen are currently writing batch files?

      Just because you run Linux (or Windows) does not automatically increase (or decrease) user problems. People won't forget their passwords with any more or less frequency under one OS or another. The day to day crap will always be there, people killing the power without shuting down first, tripping over cables, deleting files without backups etc. Dealing with all of that is the sysadmin's job, it should be expected.

      What you, as a sysadmin, should be concerned with, is how fast I can recover from a crisis, how secure is my network, and how much do I have to spend on the next upgrade. The first two items are the same for any OS they depend on the sysadmins themselves to put the correct functionality in place. The third one is the deciding factor for Linux of Windows. If you can't figure out why it is the deciding factor then you will be Microsofts best friend for years to come.

    18. Re:A soldier's perspective by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "Modified by whom?"
      whomever gets the contract. You say "We need X,Y,Z, and we need it on Linux" now you have cometitive biddings, as opposed "We need MS Office" in which case there is no competitive bidding.

      "even the army can't tell you that, so they'd say "just make it do everything""

      a great arguement for Linux. You have you Linux install plua the stuff they no they need. Now you have someone in the field thats says "I need something that does Q, and I need it Now" well then you can call the appropriet 'specialist' who can tell them what to do. yeah do stuff by phone can be a bitch, but at least it is an option MS can't provide. Linux can "do everything' because it has the tools.

      "Also, who's going to port all the lame crap software the army already has that runs under windows?

      the vendor you bought it from in the first place, assuming it's not MS.
      "Hello Acme? we need to to post that product you made to linux, or will have to get bids for that product from someone who can write it from scratch, whats that? you'll get right on it? thanks"

      What if some of it can't be ported?

      applies to MS upgrades as well.

      "People don't forget passwords or forget which printer is theirs in Linux? [scoff!]"
      If they are forgetting it windows and people can deal, why is it different if the forget there password in linux or windows?

      "You can't depend upon something being robust to protect it, you have to have people available who can fix it when it breaks.
      absoluletly. can you recompie the kernel in WIndows if you need to? how about strip out functionality? add functionality?
      For some reason you need to use a different machine, you could could recompile it.

      You get behind enemy lines and your laptop is destroyed? well if you aquire a new one, you could download a linux kernal for the system. what's that, its a 386?, no problem.

      My point is, Linux is more robust, can do more, is more configurable on the fly, and gives you more options. It would seem to me that is what you would want with any equipment.

      The strongest thing I can say, based upon my experience is that If my life depended on it, I would prefer Linux.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    19. Re:A soldier's perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey, I resent that. :-P I'm an infantryman and I've been a linux user for 6+ years. Of course... I was a programmer for many years too...

      Seriously though, you've hit the nail on the head. My god, I never met so many dumbshits in my life until I became an infantryman. My buddies are one awsome group but God knows if they had to fight on cognitive power alone we'd be in trouble.

    20. Re:A soldier's perspective by mpe · · Score: 1

      In my unit (B Co. 1/509th Abn.) we have I think 7 systems. They all run Windows 2000 and are connected to a network, through which we can access printers, other systems, and the Internet. You would be *amazed* at how many people come in a day with problems printing, getting the Internet to work, or just getting a certain program to run. You want infantrymen who at least have some familiarty with office and windows to try learning bash or mutt?

      Maybe they'd have more problems, maybe the same number, maybe even fewer.

    21. Re:A soldier's perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excuse me (to paraphrase Bill Hicks) but aren't y'all hired killers? What the fuck are you doing messing around with computers? email? I mean, WTF?! Get back out in that mud and KILL ENEMIES OF THE STATE!!! (and if some women and children get in the way, well, hell, they're only towelhead "ay-rabbs" anyway, huh?)

      The day I pay the slightest attention to a musclehead grunt in the area of IT is the day I find a new career.

    22. Re:A soldier's perspective by mpe · · Score: 1

      yeah, because linux doesn't have a native GUI you think it's use would be hard to understand? Someone that's been running linux any amount of time could setup a machine for you that would have a GUI with only buttons for office apps, internet, and mail.

      This need not be a mouse driven GUI with overlapping windows either.

      If the army mandated a free operating system,

      N.B. "free" here meaning that they are free to do whatever they liked with it once they got it.

      The problems you described do not happen with a properly configured system. If the system is setup correctly, the end user would not have the ability to make changes that would require downtime to fix.

      This can often be very difficult to do with Windows, since it goes against one of the basic design assumptions of Windows. That is that the person sat in front of the machine should be able to do whatever they like.

    23. Re:A soldier's perspective by mpe · · Score: 1

      People don't forget passwords

      Which would happen with any operating system

      or forget which printer is theirs in Linux?

      Why should they need to work this out in the first place? What's wrong with a situation where they select "print" and it comes out of the printer nearest the workstation they are using...

    24. Re:A soldier's perspective by mpe · · Score: 1

      In an open operating system, you can design the user interface, and hide all of the complexity.

      As well as making it as difficult as possible for the end user to alter anything they don't need to alter. (Especially things which could break it.)

      Linux as a standard distribution *would* be a lot harder for computer illiterates to use.

      Compared with what? A "computer illiterate" would struggle with more or less any "off the shelf" system.

      However, if you design a custom user interface, you can keep everything nice and simple, and hide all the advanced features from the user.

      Maybe you can take quite a few "features" out because they are of no use to you and there is little point dragging software you don't need around.

    25. Re:A soldier's perspective by jbayes · · Score: 1

      They all run Windows 2000 and are connected to a network, through which we can access printers, other systems, and the Internet. You would be *amazed* at how many people come in a day with problems printing, getting the Internet to work, or just getting a certain program to run.

      Okay, so you acknowledge that your Windows systems are confusing and buggy. How exactly does this make it a bad idea to switch to a system that is not confusing and buggy?

      You want infantrymen who at least have some familiarty with office and windows to try learning bash or mutt?

      No, I wouldn't try to teach them to use bash or mutt. They don't need that. But I think they could probably handle the standard Red Hat desktop, Mozilla, OpenOffice, and the like without too many problems.

      If my Mom can use it, the Infantry should be able to figure it out.

      --

      "It sure was strange to see something on Usenet about me that didn't involve Klingon gang rape." -- Wil Wheaton

  142. Re:Paying twice? -MAYBE by OrangeGoo · · Score: 1

    Dell will and does sell computers without an OS to businesses. I wanted my laptop without an OS, but they wouldn't do it unless I was a business and buying lots of them.

  143. From a soldier's point of view. by Bull999999 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm a soldier in Army Reserve and my unit is an administrative unit, which means that we make heavy use of our computers. The computers are mainly used for typing memos, making simple spreadsheets, and downloading new forms and publications off of the Internet. I do not see why a Linux or BSD machines running Open Office, Mozilla, and xPDF (or Reader for UNIX) cannot replace the current Windows machines. I have talked to soldiers that came from other reserve and active duty units and they also use their computers for similar purposes. Only software that we use that is not on Linux is FormFlow, which is one of the crapiest software I've used (yes, even worse than Windows ME). It is a simple software, so it shouldn't cost much to program something like that for non-Windows platform.

    --
    1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    1. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by mikehilly · · Score: 1

      Amen! FormFlow sucks ass. We use it here at the Air Force base I work at. If I had to pick between supporting FormFlow and *anything* I can tell you that it wouldn't be FormFlow!

    2. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by bheer · · Score: 1

      This is why Linux evangelists never make good analysts. Their logic goes like:

      - I don't do/use foo.
      - All my friends don't do/use use bar instead of foo.
      - Windows users do/use foo easily.
      - Task/feature foo is worthless.
      - Lunix ru1ez!!!

      Ever considered that you may not be the only user profile the army has to cater for? Ever consider that the vast majority of users are unfamiliar with the examples you cite and would probably view them as cheap knockoffs of the programs they are used to?

      Ever consider the cost of retraining them? And providing support?

      Naah. I thought not. Oh, btw, linux rules. Keep chanting that.

    3. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      They didn't provide training for Word or IE so why would they need to provide training for Open Office and Mozilla? I'm speaking from my personal experience and from the experiences of career soldiers that came from various other units. So tell me, how can a dipshit like you make analysis about usage of computers in the Army without experience?

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    4. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by SubtleNuance · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Oh, your a US Soldier, I should probably tell you: F.U. BABY-KILLER!

    5. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I'm not the same dipshit that you are responding to but I would have to say that the previous dipshit is correct, Army experience or not.

      I *am* a system administrator for the Army and was helpdesk support before that supporting guys just like you at headquarters and in the field. And I can tell that there are a lot of custom applications developed by different organizations that are used throughout the Army and it all runs on Windows.

      The cost of having to hire or train people to port these applications over to Linux as well as support them would probably be much bigger than what the Army paid for this contract.

      The first dipshit was right.

    6. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      If you are indeed an Army SA (although posting as AC takes away credibility), can you explain to me why my division is upgrading their computers when Pentium IIs with Windows NT4 does everything that me need to do? This move isn't about saving money, especially when there are plenty of out of work IT workers that can provide training? Since many of administrative MOSes (Army word for job) are thought by civilians, Army should not have any problems finding IT works who know both Windows and alternative platforms. Or maybe you are resisting because that means that either youâ(TM)ll have to learn another OS or get replaced by someone who can.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    7. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by praedor · · Score: 3, Informative

      Basically, any "word processor" that would generate/use those fielded pdfs (I don't recall what they're called: pdfs with specific editable entry fields, not the whole doc) would work as a replacement for formflow.


      I have been in the AF for 14 years, all told. I recall when the Z80s were all fancy-pants. The main thing that ALL/ANY military member uses their computers for is web browsing (mozilla or konqueror, etc, would suffice), word processing (OpenOffice/StarOffice would suffice - there is nothing in word that is used to any extent to make it necessary), and email using that gawd-awful Outlook. Few use the calender crap. Most use sissy fonts and that's it. If you need to use sissy fonts and non-ascii email, then kmail and virtually any other decent GUI type email app in linux is more than enough. NEED the calender crap? There are linux solutions to that too. Finally, there is powerpoint. Big deal. OO/SO does the same thing just fine. There is NOTHING that M$ brings to the PC that the military needs. Not a single app that is provided is critical only in as much as it comes from M$ or with windoze. Given that, linux would be fine (and they would have fewer worries about worms and virtually no worries wrt viruses...unlike now with doze).


      I speak as one who has been only on the user side and on the network admin side. I have run a Comm Sqd involved in laying the cable (fiber and ethernet) and admining the crappy OS. NO user is allowed to do squat to their computer. No installs without approval, no changes, etc. EVERYONE needs passwords for logging in as a user and for unlocking their screensaver (required). See anything in THAT that isn't linux? Anything there that makes M$ Doze THE answer? Didn't think so. Don't get me started on the gawd-damned mailservers (exchange!). What a crappy way to run email. One postfix install could handle as many email addresses as needed...and you could always expand to more linux mailservers if you wanted for some operational reason. Not so with exchange. You hit it's hard limit on the number of email accounts it can handle (software limited) and you have to buy/install another server. What a racket.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    8. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      Yes, I killed plenty of babies using paper cuts and PowerPoint slide presentations.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    9. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      can you explain to me why my division is upgrading their computers when Pentium IIs with Windows NT4 does everything that me need to do?

      Your division is upgrading because your systems are below minimum specs as determined by the Dept. of the Army. If memory serves, the minimum specs for a system allowed on an Army network include a 500 Mhz processor, 128 MB of RAM, and Windows 2000 Professional.

      I would say that the hardware specs have more to do with the requirement of Windows 2000, since only a couple of years ago a Pentium 200 with 64 MB of RAM was the minimum.

      The Army is trying to get away from NT4 and Win95/98 as fast as possible since they will not be supported by MS at all in the near future. Windows 2000 is a lot more secure anyway.

      This move isn't about saving money, especially when there are plenty of out of work IT workers that can provide training?

      This move is about saving money and providing a consistent platform across the entire Army. Negotiating a contract this big is going to save a lot more money than allowing each organization and activity to negotiate a variety of smaller contracts, which is basically what happens now. And we all know that those organizations are using Windows anyway.

      Since many of administrative MOSes (Army word for job) are thought by civilians, Army should not have any problems finding IT works who know both Windows and alternative platforms. Or maybe you are resisting because that means that either youâ(TM)ll have to learn another OS or get replaced by someone who can.

      I have Linux installed on my personal laptop and I support a pair HP-UX N-class servers along with our Windows machines. I'm not afraid for my job and I'm not against solutions other than Windows.

      What I am against is doing things that make my job harder. Changing to Linux would do that. It may surprise everyone here but my Windows 2000 network is solid. My servers don't go down unless I personally take them down, and 90% of the helpdesk calls these days come down to user error. I'm sure that an upgrade to WinXP will cause its share of problems, but probably not nearly as much as switching to a completely different OS.

      If you are indeed an Army SA (although posting as AC takes away credibility)

      What does that have to do with anything? I post as an AC because I post to /. so rarely that I didn't think it was worth the trouble to register. Would you feel better knowing who I am?

      Randall Bagwell
      Computer Systems Analyst
      U.S. Army Test, Measurement, and Diagnostic Equipment Activity
      Redstone Arsenal, Alabama

    10. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your probably one of the many long haired hippy freaks that I had to bandage up at the olympics in atlanta from that bomb in 96. Shoulda let you all bleed to death in that fountain as a nice new monument....

    11. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      "This move is about saving money and providing a consistent platform across the entire Army."

      I still disagree that the move would save money as I would agree with the AF guy. However, let's pretend that I do agree. By using the same argument, Army should've never moved on to rifles from muskets since that would require money and time spent for aquiring and training for the new weapons.

      "My servers don't go down unless I personally take them down"

      I have no doubt that your network is stable but how can you trust Microsoft products when they can't even secure their own products? Even as I type, I'm getting notices that GroupShield is blocking Sobig.e worms from getting through the exchange server.

      "I'm sure that an upgrade to WinXP will cause its share of problems, but probably not nearly as much as switching to a completely different OS"

      I've experimented with Samba server at my civilian job and when setup right, the enduser did not noticed any difference from a Windows file server. Of course, this may not be the case with more complex Army network.

      "Would you feel better knowing who I am?"

      It's mainly due to the fact that I'm sick tired of AC's who post "I'm right, you suck, just because I said so". Although you seem knowledable, unlike bheer who bashes me for not having any logic without presenting anything logical on his end.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    12. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I still disagree that the move would save money as I would agree with the AF guy. However, let's pretend that I do agree. By using the same argument, Army should've never moved on to rifles from muskets since that would require money and time spent for aquiring and training for the new weapons.

      I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one. Given my experience I think that a mass switch from Windows to Linux would be more expensive, but I have no hard numbers to back that up. You could be right.

      I have no doubt that your network is stable but how can you trust Microsoft products when they can't even secure their own products? Even as I type, I'm getting notices that GroupShield is blocking Sobig.e worms from getting through the exchange server.

      Microsoft does at least as good as other vendors from what I've seen. We get quite a few patches for our HP machines, and Red Hat has notified me of at least 3 new patches just this week. And the Sobig virus can't really be blamed on MS, since it comes as an executable in a zip file. It doesn't seem to exploit any vulnerability that is particular to MS products. It is just your standard trojan.

      I've experimented with Samba server at my civilian job and when setup right, the enduser did not noticed any difference from a Windows file server. Of course, this may not be the case with more complex Army network.

      I know that Linux can provide a good drop-in replacement for Windows in certain instances, but I think that consideration has taken a back seat to the desire of PHBs for consistency across networks. Also, you really have to understand just how much software is covered under this contract. I don't know if I'm allowed to discuss details in an open forum like this so I won't post them. But I can say that the list is extensive. There is a lot more available than just Windows and Office, a lot more. I was pretty surprised myself and I've known that this was coming for a little while. If you have this much software available to you, why not use it?

      It's mainly due to the fact that I'm sick tired of AC's who post "I'm right, you suck, just because I said so".

      Well, I guess I can understand that.

    13. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      I have been in the AF for 14 years, all told. I recall when the Z80s were all fancy-pants. The main thing that ALL/ANY military member uses their computers for is web browsing (mozilla or konqueror, etc, would suffice), word processing (OpenOffice/StarOffice would suffice - there is nothing in word that is used to any extent to make it necessary), and email using that gawd-awful Outlook.

      Just word processing, web browsing, and email? Really> You must be walking around with blinders on. I did 20 in the USAF (retired in '97) and I can show you 3 apps that you personally have come in contact with, that are outside that realm.

      Ever gotten an ID card? What do you think the SP uses to a) take your picture with that digital camera, and b) print the card? Word? No.
      Ever been deployed? Sure you have. Well...the s/w that maintains the schedules for all the USAF deployments, exercises, etc, is NOT held in Excel or Outlook calendar. There is a custom app for that. I know, because I wrote the original one for ACC. Since ported to Oracle, I believe.
      Ever taken your kid to the base hospital? Sure you have. How do you think they verfy his DEERS status? Another custom app.

      3 different offices, 3 completely different uses of non basic s/w. And there are zillions more. Finance, CBPO, CE, all use stuff far outside "web browsing, word processing, and email". I defy you to go into any office, and have the users get by with only the base s/w install.

      Could all those be rewritten outside of the Windows world? Sure. But it will take a lot of time, and a LOT of money to do that.

      In the case of this buy...MS is the answer, because when the money was approved, alternatives did not exist. The Army CIO didn't just get up this morning and call Billy and say "Here's 500 large. Send me some software." This contract was let, and the money approved, long ago. Star/OpenOffice for an alternative to Word/PowerPoint/Excel/Access was not (and still isn't) there.

      An organization the size of the Army has a lot of inertia behind it. Radically changing course is not to be done lightly.

    14. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by bheer · · Score: 1

      (Earlier post) They didn't provide training for Word or IE so why would they need to provide training for Open Office and Mozilla?

      Products with dominant (85%+) marketshares usually get a free pass on the training. In fact, one reason to buy them is "less formal training", since there's a huge bunch of third party books/videos for that. One of the "hidden" costs of rolling out OpenOffice is also handling the training needs of people who are "used to Word" (or, worse, are Word 'power-users') and expect every last feature to work the same way.

      And yes, there *are* users in the world who are more demanding than (from your accounts) "career soldiers". For example, PHBs. Ever tried telling a PHB his favorite spreadsheet template (which he's tended and watered for x years) won't open with OpenOffice? I wonder how the Army's PHB-equivalents feel about Calc vis-a-vis Excel.

      So tell me, how can a dipshit like you make analysis about usage of computers in the Army without experience? ... By using the same argument, Army should've never moved on to rifles from muskets since that would require money and time spent for aquiring and training for the new weapons.

      Because the army is composed of humans (even ad-hominem spouting ones like you) and because humans have certain predictable reactions to change when the change isn't critical to their jobs. An infantryman will probably learn all about a new rifle even if there isn't a chance in hell of him using that in the near future. A geek like me will spend time downloading and evaluating everything from OpenOffice 6 to the new icc even if I only ever use vim and forte. But-- it does not follow that most infantrymen give a damn about what word processor they use: they just want to learn one and use it.

      Infantryman is a bad example because I'm not speaking from personal knowledge -- for all I know, most infantrymen could be emacs fans. But if you substitute (say) 'financial analyst' above, it would be 100% a-ok.

      It's mainly due to the fact that I'm sick tired of AC's who post "I'm right, you suck, just because I said so".

      And I'm sick and tired of people proclaiming that that they other users "they know" somehow constitute valid user samples. (Hint: take any self-selected group with a pinch of salt.) Hence my I-don't-do/use-foo-hence-foo-sucks point.

      ------
      (Since everyone else is handing out bios here, here's mine)

      I'm about as far away from the Army as you can imagine (a developer for 5 years) and I have written code for Solaris and Linux in addition to Windows -- so I know a little about those three. I've been pretty fortunate of interacting with an IS staff that has to service a large number of demanding business users on a tight budget. So whatever I say is colored by that experience.

      I use Linux and Windows together everyday. Windows on the laptop, Linux on a server I ssh to for mail etc. To me, the only usable part of Linux is the command line :-). For example, even the Gnome 2 on Redhat 8 hasn't figured out how to do dialog modality right, in spite of the Mac solving the problem in 1984 and Windows getting it right in v3.0 (1990-ish).

      (Because I'm a private citizen I value my privacy somewhat, my name isn't on this public board, but my email address is bheer at myway dot com and I reply to any civil mail ;-))

    15. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by reverendslappy · · Score: 1

      They didn't provide training for Word or IE

      That's why MS is cheaper. Many, many Joe Users sit down in their cubicle for the first time, already familiar with Windows, Office, IE and other MS products and don't require training. You take the average user off the street, sit em down in front of Red Hat and they'll have a stroke right there in front of the screen just trying to start Mozilla. Sit em down in front of XP/2k and it's more likely they'll know what their doing, as chances are that's the OS they've used most before at home or elsewhere.

      That doesn't make MS better, just cheaper to implement and support because of its market penetration. You can chant "Linux Rules!" and point out that it's free all you want, but until 93% of people walk into offices already knowing Linux, you can expect more of the same kind of deals like the Army just made. Period.

    16. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      I only called you a dipshit not because you were disagreeing with me but you started name calling without giving a reason. Now since you did backup your disagreement with good reasons, I take my name calling back.

      "One of the "hidden" costs of rolling out OpenOffice is also handling the training needs of people who are "used to Word""

      I wish that Army would've at least do some controlled testing to see if the soldiers are able to make the switch before they decided to sign a six year contract. I and some others on /. believe the switch won't be a problem whereas you, Mr. Bagwell and others believe that there will be a big problem. But I guess none of us will know for sure without testing, would we?

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    17. Re:From a soldier's point of view. by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      "I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one."

      Yes, we should just agree to disagree on this.

      "I know that Linux can provide a good drop-in replacement for Windows in certain instances, but I think that consideration has taken a back seat to the desire of PHBs for consistency across networks."

      Very true, for both military and private sector.

      You should consider getting an actual /. as you are one of the better posters on /. and by posting AC, many viewers will end up missing your posts.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
  144. Here you go ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Re:Here you go ! by milo_Gwalthny · · Score: 1

      Okay, this shows a total of $212 (yes, two hundred and twelve dollars) being contributed by three individuals split between two congressional campaigns.

      Now, I believe as much as anyone here that the military-industrial complex is driving our democracy into the ground, but even I do not think a congressperson can be purchased for anything less than $500 or so.

      --
      Milo
  145. It might be a riot by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    At least it might be funny to watch when the relationship turns sour. A fleet of Army tanks invading Redmond to search for Software of Mass Destuction (SMDs) would be funny to watch.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  146. Is that a hidden way to pay Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that a hidden way that the U.S. government is using to pay Microsoft for the unpatched security holes in Internet Explorer?

  147. Keynesian economics by br00tus · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Keynes said that if the economy is in the dumper, one way to get the economy moving again is by the government spending money (that people with capital don't want to invest). FDR tried this during the Depression but there was enormous resistance by the wealthy to the socialistic programs - then WWII came about and government spending went to the then nascent armaments industry - which had less resistance from the wealthy, since it was coming directly from them. Since WWII, a lot of money has been pumped into the economy through the defense industry, and fat defense contracts have paid for everything from R&D that created the Internet, to technology used by Boeing from to build non-military jets. The government is pumping money into the economy by this method - the downside is it is a "trickle down" way of doing it, sort of like the current tax cuts skewed towards the wealthy, thus the idle rich will see a lot more money than workers.

    1. Re:Keynesian economics by tweek · · Score: 1

      You mean people who don't pay any taxes (because the actually get back more than they paid in as tax credits) don't get a REFUND?

      How odd! Maybe I should mail in all the rebates hanging on the wall of CompUSA. I didn't pay for any of the items but according to your theory I should still be able to get them.

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
    2. Re:Keynesian economics by br00tus · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Where do the idle rich get their money? How do the Hilton sisters get so much money to go out on the town? Where did Andrew Luster get the money to go partying and then fly off to Mexico? Certainly not from working. That's not how the 43% of Forbes 400 richest Americans got on that list - they inherited their way *directly* onto it. Where does their money come from? They take it from workers creating wealth - workers go into work, transform raw materials into more valuable commodities through their labor, and the heir takes a portion of that and goes and spend it however they want. You hear a lot about how we go out and work so our tax dollars can be spent on people on welfare not working in the corporate media, but how often do they talk about how we work so profits taken from the wealth we create goes to feed some idle class heir who has never worked a day in his life? Rarely, if ever.

    3. Re:Keynesian economics by tweek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My original statement still stands. I don't care about those people. But just to throw some interesting stuff your way:

      Fool.com

      Look at it this way, the high income earners are the ones who invest in the economy. These are the people that buy stocks and start companies. The ones that give jobs to others. Spurring the economy does not happen by giving someone $300 whereby they go buy a new television.

      You also state that they take it from the workers who are creating wealth. You don't have a right to work. You are free to go elsewhere and find a job if you don't like the current one. You aren't being forced at gunpoint to work there. Oh wait, white-collar work isn't as admirable as blue-collar work? Despite the fact that the white-collar managers and CEO's are the ones who EMPLOY the workers.

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
    4. Re:Keynesian economics by 3Bees · · Score: 1

      You are repeating one of the largest economic fallacies in existence. How many stocks bought are used to start companies? You can answer with percentages or raw numbers. The answer? Very few. Most investment comes in the form of speculative investment, that is; the NYSE. This is whay Adam Smith called the light foam that floats on top of the deep ocean of an economy. How is it that speculative investment has been mistaken for actual economic investment? I'm sorry, not 'mistaken', 'twisted into'.

      As for the so-called "right to work" you are parroting, that is total bs. You have just spent a paragraph saying that CEOs have the right to employ workers because they employ workers...

      --
      "I think we should tax people who stand in water! " - Mr. Gumby
    5. Re:Keynesian economics by tweek · · Score: 1

      I never made any comments that stocks bought were used to start companies. I was saying that the people who are long-term and solid investors are the people with more income. That investment can come in the form of 401k's or Roth's or many other forms. The only point I was trying to make was that looking to actors or musicians or turst fund babies as the example of the "rich" is not a fair assessment of the wealthy population of this country. People don't want to accept that the position they are in is a result of thier own making.

      Excluding people who have fallen on LEGITIMATE hardship (and that list is VERY small for me - disability is an example), the people who bitch about "rich" people are too damn lazy or just plain stupid with money and want someone else to make up for it.

      Speculative investments are no more or no less valid investments. The people who have extra income to invest are more likely to take a risk on a stock or a VC opportunity. I respect Adam Smith, but as I have to remind myself with Thomas Jefferson, he isn't the be all and end all.

      As to right-to-work, I think you misunderstand what I was saying. My point was simply that you are not guaranteed a job but you are guaranteed the same opportunity as everyone else to get a job. You may not get that job because of lack of skills or because you called the interviewer an ass in the meeting but you had the same chance as the previous applicant to get in the door. You are also free to start your OWN company and be the person doing the hiring and firing.

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
    6. Re:Keynesian economics by 3Bees · · Score: 1

      I was in the middle of typing an inspired and insightful response when my office got hit with a power outage...so I now offer you the special reader's digest condensed version:

      blah...blah....blah...lack of Jeffersonian revolutions (every 20 years by his book) in USA has led to tremendous wealth inertia (those that are wealthy will tend to stay wealthy, those that are poor will tend to stay poor)...blah....blah...blah...

      ...blah...blah...blah...

      Oh well, catch you next time this subject comes up, as it surely will! :-)

      --
      "I think we should tax people who stand in water! " - Mr. Gumby
  148. Anyone here use Win for anything other than games? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

  149. This is the Army, the grunts don't have a say... by ISPTech · · Score: 1

    The military is not a democracy. It protects a democracy. Imagine if your PHB made all the decisions without input from you. Imagine if your CEO/COO made all of the software purchases in a large company. The people who run and maintain servers in the military, report to people who report to people...who finally decide what software to buy. The overpriced hammer is a result of the managment model required for them to be able to do some of the things they are asked to do.

    Someone made a joke about RTFM. You apparently have never been involved with the military. :-) They have more than any company I have ever seen has in the way of FM's.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank.
  150. YUO FALE IT!!!!!!!111111 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG! LOLOLOOLOLLLOLLOLOL!#!Â!%!Â!"#!#

    Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
    Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  151. This is the Army's version of NMCI by Lerxst+Pratt · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Army will be rolling out these computers just like N. M. C. I.. The OS of choice will undoubtedly be Windows 2000 SP1 just as it is in N.M.C.I. Also, Office Pro 2000 SR-1a is standard on all machines amongst a host of other apps. Visio is a part of the standard suite of apps. The contract is being fulfilled by EDS. The $950.00 price tag is not across the board. That is just the baseline. Premiums will be paid for faster machines, laptops, and Science & Technology seats.

    The transition has been rough so far as users have found that they cannot abandon their legacy seats in every case. Thus, you see a lot of dual-desktop situations. I hope the Army takes into account the lessons learned from the Navy and Marine Corps' efforts.

  152. FIrst true step US takes towards world peace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No text

  153. Easy come easy gone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You fail it. :-P

  154. But, you said it would be faster. by monofish_X · · Score: 1

    The scene in South Park the movie where the army general shoots Bill Gates is one step closer to reality.

  155. Wow by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm really impressed. Microsoft must really have it on the ball. An organization known to pay $800 for a hammer chose Microsoft as their software vendor.

  156. Obligatory Everett Dirkson quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Half a billion here, half a billion there... pretty soon you're talking about real money." [with apologies to the late Senator]

  157. Complain to the Sec. of the Army by KRL · · Score: 1

    I don't know if you guys know this or not, but most government contracts have a clause that says that they can back out of a deal if a sufficient argument can be made that there is a better deal to be had.

    My point... maybe if someone made the argument to the Sec of the Army (actually, probably one of the undersecretarys) that a better computing infrastructure could be built using alternative software (Linux/*BSD/or other) and a 24/7 support team (like in the hundreds of people), they could conceivably kill this deal.

    1. Re:Complain to the Sec. of the Army by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hundreds of support people for 497,000 seats? Are you high? A 1 to 100 ratio would be 4,970 support staff, and the industry norm is lower than that (is it like 1 to 20? I'm not sure, exactly...)

      As far as the "sufficient argument" idea goes, I think you'd have a tough time convincing an undersecretary to spend countless millions on a costly and unproven enterprise migration in tough economic times. These 497,000 were likely already extant seats... Convert the entire 1,000,000+ military to Linux or *BSD or ANYTHING else? It would involve years, tens -- if not hundreds -- of millions of dollars, and an intolerable amount of risk.

      To tell you the truth, I say try to convince 'em. But I'm not going to hold my breath, and neither should you.

  158. Clueless? by Detritus · · Score: 1

    Smoking has been allowed on USN submarines. I'm not sure what the current policy is.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  159. Risky for MS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just watched South Park movie again last night, so this article brings back the memory of the command central where the 3d map of the world goes on the fritz, and BG is called in to answer, and quickly ends up with a bullet in his head.

    1. Re:Risky for MS? by tekrat · · Score: 1

      That's my favorite part of the movie! I've even got that bit sampled as a beep sound...

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  160. the Reality by FateCreatr · · Score: 0, Redundant

    i feel i need to clear a few things up for those of you who aren't in the resale industry. first off, the article says nothing about them buying the systems from Softmart. second, since this is a 6 year agreement and it says that Softmart get's a commision, this is not a resale it's an Enterprise Agreement. that kind of contract is handled direct only and Microsoft controls the pricing, but in order to make things fair for LARs (large account resellers) the deal has to be sponcered by a LAR. that reseller get's a kickback commision (like 2%), not a sale. in an Enterprise Agreement, they are agreeing to an accross the board standard to your desktops. if that $900 figure is correct then they got a great deal because that will cover the OS, Office, and all the core CALs for 6 years, including automatic upgrade rights for anything new that comes out (which given the upgrade cycle should be about 4 new versions of each). any normal company would have to pay about 5 times more for this. just try and name a company with a large install base that wouldn't jump at 4 OS's, 4 Office's and 4 of each CAL for $900. this news shows us two things in reality. one is that there is a helluva lot of markup in this product. and second is that the miltary made a good move (or MS a bad one) because they would have bought all this anyway, but at a much higher price over time. by the way, an Enterprise Agreement is not an upfront sale but a yearly payment with true-ups.
    FateCreatr, Out.

  161. Ask the USS Yorktown by gregmac · · Score: 3, Funny
    The Navy already uses Windows almost exclusively for its day-to-day computing, and it seems to be working out alright.

    So what if you have to call a tow truck every once in a while..

    --
    Speak before you think
  162. Airforce does the same thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah buddy!

  163. i dunno... by ed.han · · Score: 0

    i dunno about everyone else, but me, i see this as a golden opportunity to whine about the entire US gov't procurement system. i'm not familiar w/ it (although i'm sure someone here is and has already had his post modded +5 informative) but my understanding is it's painfully bad.

    ed

  164. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, only those of us who have jobs and don't live in our parents' basement use Windows.

  165. Budgets by shmert · · Score: 1

    All I can think while reading this story is, why can't our schools have this kind of buying power? I suppose in a way it's good, because they'd end up buying MS crap. But this seems like some flagrant flaunting of an over-budgeted organization.

    --
    You drank my drink, you drunk!
  166. The Army and M$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep....the great thing about this is that it'll be obslete within a year or two, so the Army will have to up it's budget every year........greed feeds on greed, I guess.

    After all, it IS the Army........

    1. Re:The Army and M$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a 6-year contract that likely includes "Software Assurance", a feature which buys them all future versions of the products during the life of the contract. They'll have to upgrade many times, but it's already paid for through 2009. No budget increase there.

  167. Oh, great! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    Personally I would rather see the money spent on smart bombs that minimalize civilian casualties. While I'm no lover of war, when it's necessary, I personally think killing less innocent people is good.

    Um. So we could use them in places like Iraq, to "stop the terrorist threat and prevent Saddam from using his weapons of mass destruction"?

    The United States hasn't been in a "necessary" war since World War II. Bombing people in Bosnia or Iraq is hardly "necessary".

    1. Re:Oh, great! by destine · · Score: 1

      I hate reply to flamebait, BUT if we would have taken care of Hitler BEFORE he became a world wide problem we would not have had world war II.

      When does war become necessary? Before or after my children are nuked, infected with smallpox, or whatever else this guy was working on. Both US and British intelligence said that this guy needed to go and his regime with him. Would I have liked everyone from the other countries in the world to get on board first? Absolutely. No question. But when foreign agencies are willing to put me and my family at risk for personal and financial gain, I have to say no thank you. You can't ignore a problem and hope it goes away. Sorry, but it's time to grow up and face the real world. Sadam was a danger to the world and it's a better place without him.

      But I will say this. I respect your opinion on it. Noone likes war. Not even President Bush(though I'm guessing he likes it more than most. He never did lose that look in his eye after the World Trade Center Bombing). It's good to stand up and proclaim, "No war!" But there IS a time for war. And while we can hope beyond all hope, we can't ignore danger just because we don't want conflict.

    2. Re:Oh, great! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      if we would have taken care of Hitler BEFORE he became a world wide problem we would not have had world war II.

      Maybe. I just finished a class on the German political struggles during and immediately before World War II :-), actually, and while perhaps such ambitions moves as Hitler made would have been postponed, to claim that things like the Rhineland and severe Jewish issues wouldn't have happened without Hitler is quite arguable.

      Before or after my children are nuked, infected with smallpox, or whatever else this guy was working on.

      That's ridiculous. Despite what it's pretty safe to say is probably the most exhaustive weapons hunt in the modern world, we haven't been able to turn up any of these hoards of WMD that Bush kept claiming that Saddam had.

      Both US and British intelligence said that this guy needed to go and his regime with him.

      US and British *executive leadership* said that he needed to go. The two are not synonymous.

      No question. But when foreign agencies are willing to put me and my family at risk for personal and financial gain

      I don't understand. When did this happen?

      Sadam was a danger to the world and it's a better place without him.

      Destine, a *brick* is a danger to the world. It could potentially slide down a hill and hit a goat, which would run in front of a car and cause a crash, giving someone a concussion.

      Saddam was possibly the *least* likely world leader to take hostile measures against the United States, because the only reason he was hanging on to his regime was because world opinion was that the US shouldn't wipe him out. The claim of "defense" would be a blank check for the US to drop him. Saddam wasn't involved with al Queda. He hasn't instigated terrorist attacks against the United States. He has not taken foreign military action against the United States. As a matter of fact, the only conflict he's engaged the United States in has been defensive -- the only form of military conflict allowed under the United Nations charter, and incidently one that the United States has broken many, many times (see my sig).

      Saddam was not particularly dangerous to the United States. He *was*, however, controlling the world's second largest supply of the United State's most crucial foreign import. Now, after our invasion of Iraq, we've decided that we need to control the government of Iraq for an indefinite period of time.

      Granted, this could all be innocent concidence. There could be a reason we went after Iraq other than Libya, North Korea, etc.

      But there IS a time for war. And while we can hope beyond all hope, we can't ignore danger just because we don't want conflict.

      Two assumptions there I don't agree with -- first,, that I claimed that we should never have war (as a matter of fact, I specifically said that our involvement in WWII was justified, which was a mere sixty years ago). Second, that Saddam was a danger. Hell, Saudi Arabia has been *far* more involved with assaulting the United States (the Cole, 9/11) than Iraq has, but Saudi Arabia is a pushover when it comes to giving us oil. Not surprisingly, Saudi Arabia's role in all this has been neatly ignored.

  168. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Gsus411 · · Score: 1

    I'm a sys admin and I need it for stuff like Terminal Services on the 2k machines I administer. No, I don't have a choice of which OS we use. If it were up to me, we'd be running Debian or OpenBSD.

  169. This is insulting to Americans by bigberk · · Score: 1, Insightful

    In the USA, education is a mere 14% of the military budget -- pretty sick, isn't it?

    Children are losing out, and with that money Microsoft is growing. Now isn't that disgusting?

    1. Re:This is insulting to Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why BUSH HAS TO GO!

      Education is sadly neglected in favor of a military-industrial-police state.

    2. Re:This is insulting to Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Education should be 0% of the budget. Government should not be in the business of providing free education for citizens.

    3. Re:This is insulting to Americans by DMDx86 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yawn.. throwing money at education doesn't help. It requires good people running the show, first. My school district showers themselves with new laptops, PDA'a, and other gadgets, but gives the students the pits (incomptent teachers, low quality textbooks,etc).

      If public schooling had bigger competeition (read: vouchers), they would have reason to raise their quality to compete with other schools.

    4. Re:This is insulting to Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm guessing the teachers don't see any of that swag, just the administration.

      Why don't you call the local TV station / paper and let them know.

      I'd say that it takes good people watching the people running the show.

    5. Re:This is insulting to Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flaimebait? How about posting a reply instead of moderating me down, or is it that you have absolutley no argument whatsoever?

      Fuck you. At least any sensible person who gets your mod in metamod will not see anything "flamebait" about my comment and your abusive moderations will result in you not getting mod access in the future

      You know, if I was modeated down offtopic, I would not be offended but the fact that you disagreed with me and had no balls to RESPOND is what shows your true colors and stupidity.

      Burn in hell.

    6. Re:This is insulting to Americans by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Yawn.. throwing money at education doesn't help. It requires good people running the show, first. My school district showers themselves with new laptops, PDA'a, and other gadgets, but gives the students the pits (incomptent teachers, low quality textbooks,etc).
      If public schooling had bigger competeition (read: vouchers), they would have reason to raise their quality to compete with other schools.


      And we can surmise by your post that you are a product of an incompetent teacher?

    7. Re:This is insulting to Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this the best you have? Do you have anything better than a pathetic ad-hominem? Thought not. At least I can make a reasoned argument.

    8. Re:This is insulting to Americans by metachimp · · Score: 1
      The thing about vouchers is this: private schools can't absorb everyone who wants to go to them. Indeed, in California, all private schools in the California federation of independent schools have stated that they will not accept vouchers. Parochial schools can't take everyone, either.


      The solution to the education problems in this country is not gutting public education. Vouchers are a clever ploy espoused by people who are ideologically opposed to public education. It's not a very well thought out plan.


      The single most important thing we could do for education in this country would be to find money to pay teachers more, so that the good ones will stay in the profession. When I got out of college, I had 5 friends who became teachers. Today, only one is still a teacher. Why? The pay sucks, parents abuse them, the hours are long and it's a thankless job.


      If the pay for teachers was better, it would become a viable career choice for people who bring passion and expertise to their jobs, not a place for incompetant, unimaginative people who can't be fired.

      --
      The system has failed you, don't fail yourself. --Billy Bragg
    9. Re:This is insulting to Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that colleges are just turning out graudates with "Education" degrees that are meaningles.

      Raising pay would attract better teachers, BUT, you would have to raise the standard of those you hire, otherwise you will just have the same idiots coming in with education degrees getting higher pay.

      The reason why I dont like public school is that they have no reason to improve themselves. If parents had the choice to send take THEIR OWN MONEY they pay in taxes and use it to educate their children elsewhere and enough parents actually take advantage of this, this would create a demand for better private schooling and would make public schools improve themselves to try to keep their money.

      Government has a history of NOT doing a good job with any managed bureaucracy and I see school no different.

    10. Re:This is insulting to Americans by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Lighten up, Francis. It was a joke.

    11. Re:This is insulting to Americans by metachimp · · Score: 1
      use it to educate their children elsewhere and enough parents actually take advantage of this, this would create a demand for better private schooling and would make public schools improve themselves to try to keep their money.


      A nice idea, but where are all these schools going to come from? Private schools only take the best students. Students who are 'just average' won't get a place at the table. Think about what you're proposing: a permanent uneducated underclass of people who didn't go to school because all the public schools have been closed and the private schools are full up. It's not as though people will say "Well, Private school X is full, so we'll just go build another one." In poor areas, the money will not be there, and so what's to become of all those people? The world needs ditch-diggers, too?


      I know a lot of people involved in public education, and while there's some waste going on, they all want to improve the quality of their schools, so that kind of defeats your "no incentive" argument.


      De-funding public schools is simply not an option.


      WRT to the whole "It's their money" argument, you know, we live in a society. It's your obligation as the benficiary of this society to fulfill your end of the bargain.

      --
      The system has failed you, don't fail yourself. --Billy Bragg
  170. ha funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    first time the US Army actually PAYS for Software.

    The irony about the whole piracy bit it is that the US Army is among the biggest pirates out there, and got the worst attitude about it. At least on the enlisted man side. I cannot immagine field grade officers being any diffrent.

    Generals on the other hand might get pissy

  171. chat time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes! Slashdot now has a room on AOL Instant Messenger.

    Join chat room "Slashdot" or use this AIM hyperlink: Click Here .

  172. I disagree with that characterization of military by dh003i · · Score: 1

    as being down-skilled in regards to intelligence and computer aptitude. But even if it were true, there are still DE/WM combinations, along with various default installs of apps, that make things easy for such a demographic.

    Install KDE or GNOME with WindowMaker or Sawfish, and a good file-browser, like Gentoo or GWorkspace, along with some apps like OpenOffice, Phoenix, and that do-it all e-mail prog (forget it's name).

  173. Re:uh oh = big ass faggot by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

    Shit thanks. I'll keep a list for next time.

    As god as my witness I will make those jokes seriously uncool.

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  174. Really? NSA likes it by MadMirko · · Score: 1

    From the NSA Homepage(emphasis mine):

    NSA has developed and distributed configuration guidance for Microsoft Windows NT and Windows 2000 in the form of configuration guides. These guides are currently being used throughout the government and by numerous entities as a security baseline for their Windows systems.

    To assist our Windows XP user community, NSA has developed security configuration guidance for Windows XP, with the cooperation of other government agencies and industry partners who provided their expertise and extensive technical review. The configuration guide for Microsoft Windows XP is being posted on the NSA web site and is presented in two parts: ".INF" file and the configuration guide.

    1. Re:Really? NSA likes it by kk5wa · · Score: 1

      NSA has approved wireless, but you haven't exactly seen DoD jumping on it. I could use it for some of my stuff, that's for sure.

      --
      sine puella vita suget
    2. Re:Really? NSA likes it by kk5wa · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the individual services own certification processes above and beyond NSA cert/approval. An NSA stamp doesn't guarantee acceptance.

      --
      sine puella vita suget
  175. Re:Paying twice? -MAYBE by Havokmon · · Score: 1
    Dell will and does sell computers without an OS to businesses. I wanted my laptop without an OS, but they wouldn't do it unless I was a business and buying lots of them.

    Is the military a business? IMHO, the DEA is :P

    --
    "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
  176. typical by efriese · · Score: 1

    Its typical of the government to something like this. Our tax dollars at work I guess!

  177. Re:uh oh = big ass faggot by bytes256 · · Score: 0

    No problem

    Anything to help a very good cause

    --

    Slashdot, the site where everything's made up and the points don't matter
  178. What Beatle Baily thinks by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

    Go to this page http://www.kingfeatures.com/features/comics/bbaile y/aboutMaina.php

    and get the June 10th comic.

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  179. Buy Direct? by afabbro · · Score: 1
    Does Microsoft sell direct? Some of the biggest do not. Weirdly, you can buy Sun (for example) direct, but you get better pricing (by a LOT) if you go through a VAR because Sun wants to support that channel. There are some manufacturers (in this and other industries) which simply do not sell direct ever - you want the goods, you buy from a VAR, even though the manufacturer may still have a sales force (sort of a "regional rep").

    I don't buy MS but I'm wondering if they use the same model, in which case the Army using a VAR wouldn't surprise me.

    --
    Advice: on VPS providers
  180. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use rdesktop to administer those RDP machines.

  181. Oh Christ!!! by ducster · · Score: 0

    The US Army and Microsoft team up. Does this mean when the US Army shoot at allied troops they will be able to blame it on a buggy Microsoft targetting system instead of themselves?

  182. Pacifists Dreams are coming true. by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 0, Troll

    After severeal deals like these every pacifists dream will become true. The US military will have fully disarmed,and while being the most expensive military in the world it will not be able to hurt a fly.

    If anyone has followed the most recent military programs, such as the last super-advanced bombers and fighters that have all proven absolutely useless, knows what i am talking about.

    1. Re:Pacifists Dreams are coming true. by ducster · · Score: 1

      Errrrrr, when did they prove useless? I thought the ability to take out a building in the centre of town from hundreds of miles away is pretty bloody impressive myself. A few did go stray, but the error margin was probably less then 0.5% They only real issues where friendly fire, Human errors, and psycho yanks in warthogs mowing down british troops.

    2. Re:Pacifists Dreams are coming true. by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I am not talking about cruise missiles. They work very well, but they were not a result of the latest stage of military procurement.

      I am talking about B-1s, B-2s, F-22s etc. The stealth bombers were taken out of combat (and have not been back) after the serbs shot down a couple. Nobody knows what the hell the B-1 is supposed to be used for. The airforce is trying to get rid of it quetly.

      It turns out the only useful bomber we still have is the old b-52, which was supposed to be replaced by the b1 and then by the b2.

      similarly we were supposed to get 800 f22s to replace 1600 existing planes. After several cost overruns, we are going to get for the same money a 100 F22s that are so fragile and maintainance intensive, they are only used for dicovery channel documantaries.

      Oh and lets not forget that weird helicopter plane crossover, that has killed about 30 marines, last time i checked, without going into a single combat mission.

  183. Ultra Stupid by Ballresin · · Score: 1

    Since the military has had many problems with their software when purchased or provided through Microsoft. I wish I was in closer contact to my cousin. He's 3rd string Secret Service for President Bush, and he's a computer nerd as well. He'd probably keep track of things if he was in a position where he could.

    I remember when the DoD bought a bunch of G4s back when the commercial from Apple described the machines as "Supercomputers", and the Pentagon had declared them as such, so they couldn't be shipped outside the US for a while. This had all happened because they were running into the BSoD so often on the aircraft carriers and such. (Rumor has it a divide by zero error on NT caused one such craft to shut down completely.)

    Well...this has obviously been in the works for a while, because I would hope the Services would have taken a look at the G5 if computer technology had been in their budget. But they don't even ship for 2 months and other things are already settled. Oh well.

    I just think it is enormously dumb for the Services to purchase ANYTHING software wise. I think they'd have their enlisted computer nerds shipped off to a base and forced to program a perfectly solid OS for them, as well as accompanying software.

    Double oh well.

    --
    I got nothin'.
    1. Re:Ultra Stupid by DMDx86 · · Score: 1

      Rumor has it a divide by zero error on NT caused one such craft to shut down completely

      What, your Macs could magically divide by zero?

    2. Re:Ultra Stupid by Ballresin · · Score: 1

      No, stupid.

      You CAN'T divide by zero.

      Windows NT TRIED to.

      And as with all things Windows, it CRASHED WHEN IT DISCOVERED THAT ZERO IS NOT DIVISIBLE!

      Thus: Windows is an inferior Operating System that should be recycled into something more usefull....like children's books.

      --
      I got nothin'.
  184. Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are trolling. I will call you trollie!

  185. A billion dollars by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

    Um, Microsoft paid almost three times the value of this contract in taxes last quarter. Read their income statement.

  186. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Easy ....

    Stop being a cheap little bitch, and upgrade to something newer than WinME.

  187. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by notque · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    Work.

    --
    http://use.perl.org
  188. Imagine. by turgid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Imagine if they'd spent that amount of money on a space shuttle replacement, or a manned^H^H^H^H^H^Hpersonned mission to Mars.

    1. Re:Imagine. by jonfelder · · Score: 1

      Exactly what would a manned mission to Mars get us?

      How about they spend that money on curing world hunger, cleaning up the environment, and/or medicine for poor people in 3rd world countries?

      We probably should be cleaning up problems on our own planet before traveling to another one and screwing it up.

    2. Re:Imagine. by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't go very far. A space shuttle replacement or a manned mission to mars would cost a lot more than half a billion.

    3. Re:Imagine. by turgid · · Score: 1

      Exactly what would a manned mission to Mars get us?
      In a word : inspiration

    4. Re:Imagine. by jonfelder · · Score: 1

      I think a clean environment, an end to poverty, and no hunger or sickness would be much more inspirational.

    5. Re:Imagine. by turgid · · Score: 1

      Why would it be inspirational? What would it inspire people to do?

  189. That's almost as silly as... by Bueller_007 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ...paying $640 for a toilet seat cover, $435 for a hammer or $7,600 for a coffee maker. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly .asp?ARTICLE_ID=17695

  190. Interesting. by turgid · · Score: 1

    He goes on to explain that the ashtray costs $400 to research and to make; however, whenever you are in a sub, the ashtray won't break into millions of bits during combat action.
    Very interesting. How does this relate to Microsoft software? *ducks*

    1. Re:Interesting. by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Maybe it means that the military does, in fact, probably know what they're doing - despite what Slashdot readers say ('cause they obviously know better!).

    2. Re:Interesting. by turgid · · Score: 1

      I've worked for a large, safety-critical, government beaurocracy in my time, and I can assure you it didn't know what it was doing, especially when buying technical goods and services. I doubt the US military is much different.

    3. Re:Interesting. by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      He goes on to explain that the ashtray costs $400 to research and to make; however, whenever you are in a sub, the ashtray won't break into millions of bits during combat action. --Very interesting. How does this relate to Microsoft software? *ducks*

      Simple, Al Gore is going to go on David Letterman carrying a hammer, nail, piece of wood and a CDRom with Office on it. Then he is going to nail the CDRom to the piece of wood, thus demonstrating that the hole in the center works.

      In defference to Al's position with Apple they will use the version of Office for the Mac.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  191. You are shitting me, right? by twitter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is a thinlly disguised economic stimulus package, or they got robbed. Software merrit and pricing would never lead to a deal like that.

    They are site licensing the server products, almost the entire product line. Sharepoint, SQL Server, etc etc etc ad nauseaum.

    Indeed, I feel ill. What exactly does all that shit provide that free software does not? Vendor lock-in? Great.

    The details aren't being disclosed because MS doesn't want their other customers getting pissed at the ball breaking that the Army gave them

    Nuts. I've never heard of a non-clasified public purchase with a NDA. It's my half a billion dollars, I want the details. Only crooks who sell crap have to hide their details. You would think they would be happy to give anyone buying half a million computers a similar deal.

    There's no excuse for buing into more Microshit right now. Computer hardware has been more than adequate for general purpose desktop computing for the last six years. If the software those computers came with is no longer up to the task, I suggest looking at alternate software. There are a few other good American companies that could use this kind of shot in the arm but would provide a much better product:

    We can be sure that Dell, Gateway, etc would be happy to work with any of the above software firms for this contract.

    The fact of the matter is that the US Army took a half a million computer order and got themseves treated like some dinky midsized company with a thousand desktops. Next thing you know, they will be on the three year upgrade cycle. They did it because they were told to do it that way or they were incompetent. Either way, it's un-fucking-forgivable. They have a whole, ummm, Army of technically qualified people!

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:You are shitting me, right? by HBI · · Score: 4, Informative

      Twitter:

      Your open source advocacy is beyond reproach, but the reality of things is that the Army doesn't always get the best and brightest. MS' products _are_ easier to administer, which is why OSS has not made much of a dent in the desktop or file and print areas inside the Army. I know of several OSS advocates in my own organization: they are great, talented people, but if we try to hand Linux to some of the less skilled folks, we have an issue. OSS gets used in specific locations for specific tasks under close supervision. We get paid to make sure stuff runs, and meets user expectations. MS products do that, despite their negative facets, such as security vulnerability.

      Take that as answer to your first two pronouncements.

      In regards to contract secrecy, i'm sure if you dug hard enough you could find out what the details are. They just aren't being publicized.

      I like OSS. Linux, the BSDs, Apache, MySQL, the list goes on of fine packages I have used and will continue to use. Despite that, however, my job entails providing IT support for a busy organization. There is no time for advocacy for me. I have to do the job in the best way possible, taking into account manpower limitations, budget, and user expectation. When OSS fits, and does the job better, we use it. It doesn't always, though.

      Incidentally we have RH and Solaris running for various tasks.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    2. Re:You are shitting me, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      In case you don't know, the military does give Sun quite a bit of money. Not directly, but through the various contracts for the MI systems they have. A good portion of these systems run on Sun hardware/software.

    3. Re:You are shitting me, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whats the price of Coffee at Redmond, Washington mr Slave?

      You don't like a shit, liar, you are working for MS... Fucking moron.

  192. Oh, for God's sake... by o'reor · · Score: 1
    They have a firm to blame AND hold accountable that is dedicated to serving them

    Like Microsoft has ever been held accountable for any software failure.
    Like they admit immediately that they are at fault.
    Like it never takes them more than 3 days to publish a patch.
    Like they are going to refund the administration for any inconvenience due to their software (the SQLServer vulnerabilities and worms, anyone ?).
    Like it wouldn't be better to have a FS/OSS infrastructure, with a handful of FS/OSS programmers with a good grasp of the code to act immediately in case of a major problem.

    These knee jerk reactions are oldhat.

    Riiiight. How about stupid excuses such as "They have a firm to blame" ? Why not "they have a dead horse to beat" ?

    I think it would be a real change in the mentality and efficiency of everyone in his/her job, not only in the army but also in other administrations, if, instead of having a "blame Microsoft" excuse, people only had a "blame yourself" excuse. That would bring a real level of responsibility and commitment to everyone at every stage in the deployment of IT.

    "Dedicated to serving them.". MmmmmppffrrtBWA-HA-HA-HA !!!

    --
    In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
  193. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Mantorp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd bet that a huge majority of Slashdot readers use Windows as their primary OS. Both at home and work. I've tried a few different Linux distros at home, but keep coming back to Windows because I know how to do things in it and it's just easier. If time wasn't an issue I'd try harder to kick the habit. I do use Mozilla because I'm hooked on tabbed browsing and mouse gestures so give me a little credit.

  194. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by drunk_as_in_beer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    A better question is why do people on Slashdot still hang onto IE? Windows I can understand, because many of us are at work when we are posting, but why IE? I would guess that 95% of the posters on here are using IE, and that doesn't even take into account the lurkers and people who only view the front page.

    --
    --Drunk as in Beer
  195. xboxes by aftermath09 · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many xboxes with Halo are included? ;-)

  196. On the lighter side... by ziegast · · Score: 1
    Army changes its recruiting marketing:


    • Out: I am an Army of one.

      In: You will be assimilated.


    New .NET ads...

    • Now there's one degree of separation between you and the people we want to kill.


    I heard that the Army is changing it ranking system:


    • Enlisted recruit -> Developer Preview
      Private -> 1.0
      Corporal -> 1.0 Service Pack 1
      Sergeant -> 3.0
      Lieutenant -> 2000
      Major -> 2003
      General -> Longhorn
      Commander in Chief -> Nickname: Gates


    That's almost 500000 computers all running Windows, folks. With a 20:1 ratio, that's 25000 MCSA jobs. Those certification schools were right! I need to certify today!


    In other news...

    REDMOND, Wa - Microsoft, now a strategic national security asset, is increasing security around it's Redmond, Washington campus. Now known as "Fort Redmond", a 20 foot wall laced with barbed wire is expected to be built within the year. Local residents are outraged....


    We now have new respect for technologies like Windows Terminal Server or GotoMyPC.com combined with Centrino technology. That could be a tank you're logging into.



    Overheard during a training exercise:
    "Sorry, Sarge, I can't find the orders yet. Its mixed in here somewhere with all of this spam.



    Enough already!
  197. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by pboulang · · Score: 2, Informative
    There are term serv / remote desktop clients available outside of the windows platform.

    How about this one?

    You could also use VNC or similar.

    --

    This comment is guaranteed*

    *not guaranteed

  198. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by TrippTDF · · Score: 1

    I'm with you on that one. I've tried many a time to switch to Red Hat as my primary OS except for gaming, and it's hard. As much as I want to get away from M$, XP works really well for the stuff that I do with it (music playback, DVD watching, gameing, browsing).

    I could live without a lot of that, but why would I want to?

  199. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by DigitalJEM · · Score: 3, Insightful

    hehe... I like that comment. Windows is actually a fairly good OS. While everyone complains about it, it does work, most of the time. Too bad "most of the time" isn't good enough for "most people". Then again, if switching OS's on your computer were as easy as switching cell phone providers, Microsoft would have gone bankrupt a very long time ago. :-)

    --
    -Joshua
  200. Military intellegence by unoengborg · · Score: 1

    Now, all intellegence organisations round the world will be occupied by spying on the US to find out how this blue screen of death weapon really works.

    Preliminary tests in Germany have already indicated that penguins totally resists the effects of this weapon.

    --
    God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
  201. I thought windows wasnt allowed in combat by Spikeman56 · · Score: 1

    My uncle works at the CIA and according to him the government isnt allowed to use Windows for combat (apparently windows says in documentation you can't use Windows in combat situations). So they use a modified combat-version of unix. What would the army be using 494,000 non-comabt windows computers? ~Spikeman56

  202. Typical slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the erroneous statement bashing Microsoft is modded up, and the posts correcting it are untouched.

  203. $470,000,000 by Bigby · · Score: 1

    No matter how you look at it, Microsoft just made $460 million profit. That is considering $11 million in paperwork, marketing to the Army, and paying some government officials off; which is an over-estimation in their expenses. Non-the-less, you see how they sit on $40 billion in cash (soon to be ~$40.5 billion).

  204. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by DigitalJEM · · Score: 1

    I would unstall the crap if I were able to. But, then if and when my computer crashed, once it came back online, I wouldn't be able to file a "report" about it with microsoft, cause that thing only works under IE :-( I use Mozilla for everything else, and so far it's the best thing I've used.

    --
    -Joshua
  205. Military Intelligence by deaton · · Score: 1

    ... is proven yet again.

  206. Re:bye bye to the most powerful army in the world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Welcome to last year. I thought zealots usually were more up-to-date than this. I don't know of anyone who has seen a BSOD in the last year or so. I've seen as many kernel panics in the last year as Windows crashes and I have both Linux and Windows boxes that run 24/7.

    Mod: -1 (Antiquated humor)

  207. Not much improvement. by twitter · · Score: 1
    Are you really advocating coroprate welfare for MicroShit?

    Wow. And I thought that flood of money coming in from around the world might seep into the US economy some how.

    If they really had all that money comming in, they would not need my tax money would they?

    You're going to tell me that Microsoft keeps all its money in Swiss bank accounts now too, and only employees people from China.

    They could tell you both of those things. It's not like it's going to their stockholders or employees. M$ is notorious for getting work done with perma-temps and engaging in other tight fisted nonsense. They are also working hard to replace everyone with offshore labor because starvation wages in India are much less than starvation wages in Redmond. That's unforgivable for a company that never paid a dividend till last year. But, you know, a company that screws it's custormers will also screw it's employees and stockholders.

    The recently inked deal screws you and me too. Just when I thougt I'd escaped the M$ tax, Uncle Sam gives it back to me.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:Not much improvement. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's tough to take anyone seriously who uses terms like "MicroShit". Really, did, I could not read your post beyond that. Grow up and peopple will listen to you.

  208. Don't be surprised by wuice · · Score: 1

    Don't be surprised if this isn't much more than just the operating system, office, and a few other pieces of the Microsoft suite. These kinds of sweet deals happen all the time - it's the government's way of thanking the companies that keep them in power. Maybe I'm reading a little too much into it, but it sounds like a classic case of pork-barreling to me.

    One of the reasons a hammer costs $700 (to use a fictional example) is because whoever sells the hammer will be giving some of that $700 to campaign contributions and lobbying and the like.

  209. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by DigitalJEM · · Score: 1

    Yes, Mozilla and Tabbed Browsing kicks butt.

    --
    -Joshua
  210. So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More fool them. They won't be able to read and use the various office and open formats that the rest of the world uses.

  211. Some numbers by pmz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...$471,000,000...494,000 Army computers...

    A FAQ I found at www.navy.mil says there are 480,000 active-duty soldiers in the U.S. Army.

    I know there is a bureaucracy beyond just the soldiers, but one of sufficient size to require more computers than there are solidiers??? Also, this deal appears to be just for the Army--not other DoD agencies that do a lot of stuff for the Army.

    From the Yahoo! article: Keith Hodson, a Microsoft spokesman, said the contract could help the Army reduce its costs and "validates the Army's belief in our security model."

    This isn't exactly something to validate a citizen's belief in the Army's security model!

    Additionally: "We look at the Army deal as incremental evidence that Microsoft continues to outperform as a business and that the longer-term, subscription style business model is indeed gaining significant traction," Di Bona wrote in his report.

    As final proof of its global power, Microsoft is now taxing the U.S. Government!

  212. You're in the wrong place by mao+che+minh · · Score: 1
    The above was a Slashdot post, not the results of a professional study performed by a seasoned research firm and backed by a meticulous panel of scientists.

    I think that you're looking in the wrong place if you are seeking material for a study.

    But I guess this all goes without saying - you wildly witty dog you.

  213. Is there a different EULA compared to volume lic? by buysse · · Score: 1
    I just thought of a possible reason to go through a reseller and buy boxed, full (not upgrade) licenses. Does the EULA for a boxed full copy include the audit clauses? I know that Licensing 6.0 has provisions for MS to "inspect" customer sites to ensure compliance. A inspection of this type would not be compatible with national security requirements, especially for systems containing classified information (generally not on networks or on secure, closed networks.)

    Also, I know that the [windows] certification is bogus, but are there any C2 or higher certified Linux distributions? C2 or higher is one of those required rubber stamps in the procurement process, and there's no port of Office to Trusted Solaris.

    In short, there are a lot of reasons why the government may choose to purchase retail. Besides technical reasons, you can think of this as a Bush administration "Economic Stimulus Package."

    --
    -30-
  214. RedHat by Thuktun · · Score: 1

    I know this is mod as funny but, this scenario would be highly doubtful as they would most likely have wanted some level of support to go along with the software.

    I hear RedHat might have some kind of support or something...

    1. Re:RedHat by fitten · · Score: 1

      That's what I said, but it costs more than $0 last time I visited RH's website.

  215. Why Windows? Why not !!! by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading various comments here, I thought Iâ(TM)d stick my nose in. [background â" former USAF Windows programmer]

    Wait a minute... they just agreed to purchase half a billion dollars worth of software and you're saying they can't afford to hire people to oversee the customization and support they might need with something like Linux?
    Fools
    Waste of tax dollars
    Use a FOSS solution!
    Linux would be way better
    Simple corporate welfare
    Shame on the military for using Windows in the first place!
    BSOD
    Crashing missiles
    blah de blah de blah


    Hereâ(TM)s a shocker. Windows may be more cost effective for a huge organization that already is using Windows. Let me repeat thatâ¦

    Windows may be more cost effective.

    How so? They already use it. Switching to Linux for the desktop would take several years, and be considerably more than $0.5B. With the possibility of it going very, very wrong. Not all Win -> Linux conversions go smoothly.

    Why so long and costly? There are literally thousands of custom apps, large and small, that the Army runs on. Already written and in use. Everything from creating ID cards to allocating training munitions to various units. Currently, they run on Windows. What do you think they use now? Pencil and paper?All of these would have to be rewritten in some way. 2, 3, 5 10 years ago when all this stuff was being written, guess what? A viable Linux solution was but a wet dream. You had but 2 choices, Apple or Windows, for regular desktop deployment.

    Now...of course you cannot roll out a whole new desktop environment all across the Army on the same day. There will be considerable overlap. So you also have to ensure interoperability between old and new as you roll out. The Army cannot stop business for the several years while this is going on.

    You also have to ensure that all of your current hardware is supported. Are there Linux print drivers for the ID card printers? How about the digital camera for that?
    Can we build a Linux solution to interface with the hospital patient records db? Sure...but we already have a Windows solution that works, and works well.
    Can Civil Engineering find a Linux CAD solution, equivalent to AutoCAD, to design the plumbing and electrics for a new dormitory? Haven't seen one.
    What about Public Affairs and the imaging shop? Are there Linux drivers for the digital Nikons they use? Oh..we have to have those written. But there are already native Win drivers for those...supported from the factory.
    Laptops. Will Linux work on all the various laptops (with their custom mouse and video drivers) the Army deploys? Maybe...maybe not. But Windows already does. They might well have to buy a whole fleet of different laptops, if Linux can't be made to run effectively on the ones they have.

    Linux may well be more stable, secure, and crash (slightly) less. But this is basically desktop use. So what! This is regular desktop use. It just doesnâ(TM)t matter if it is not the most absolute secure system on the planet. These systems are not facing the outside. And not running life critical apps. They don't steer missiles with Win2K.

    Take all that into account (and this is but the merest tip of the iceberg) and staying with Windows might well be cheaper than trying to switch.

    1. Re:Why Windows? Why not !!! by forkboy · · Score: 0

      Those of us that aren't frothing at the mouth Linux zealots understand that the military needs to use Windows because that's what your average grunt knows how to use.

      Our beef is with the fact that many of the machines they bought licenses for already had a usable version of Windows on it. They also didn't try and cut any kind of deal. Buying Windows XP Pro and Office XP off the shelf at CompUSA will cost you about $950 right now. They bought 471,000 copies and didn't get a fucking volume discount? Come ON, man. It's a blatant waste of taxpayer money. (Which is not a shock coming from the DoD)

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    2. Re:Why Windows? Why not !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They got Windows XP, Office XP, Windows Server products and associated CALs, and upgrades for the next 6 years all for ~$950 per machine. Try to get that deal at CompUSA.

    3. Re:Why Windows? Why not !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh no! He said something bad about Linux! Mod him down again!

    4. Re:Why Windows? Why not !!! by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Windows may be more cost effective.

      How so? They already use it.


      Another way of saying the same thing is: "Penny wise, pound foolish".

      Not that I even agree with your premise that it would cost more to switch immediately.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    5. Re:Why Windows? Why not !!! by rzbx · · Score: 1

      Yes, in the short term it does cost less most of the time to stick with the current system.
      The problem is long term. Our taxes pay for all of this. Stability and security are major issues that will only grow with time. A system that wasn't designed well from the ground up, is not going to have a much more difficult time than one designed for stability and security from the beginning. You have to admit that Microsoft focused and still does to a pretty good extend on ease-of-use. Although OSS is not easy to use, it can be. An easy to use interface is just that, an interface. It is evolutionary. Things become easier to use overtime with advances in technology. Microsoft unfortunately tried to go for ease-of-use before having a strong foundation. They did more harm to the IT industry than most people realize.

      Our taxes pay for all of this. I would much rather have our government hire IT professionals that create OSS and implement it than outsourcing everything to private companies that use proprietary code. There is too much risk in using proprietary code. Do you want me to start listing them? The government doesn't necessarily have to have permenant IT employees either. Contract out the work. Those that do a poor job would not get another contract. It would be easier to contract with another since there would be no lock-in and all the software can be worked on by the new group/person.
      There is a lot of talk about all the software that has to be ported. I say go for it, and in the mean time, a good portion could probably be run on win32 emulators. Who says they can't keep a small portion running proprietary software anyway? One thing we can't do is simply give up on solutions. Allowing one company to have such control is very anticapitalistic.

      --
      Question everything.
    6. Re:Why Windows? Why not !!! by jwhitener · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I hope that everyone reads your comment YrWrstNtmr and then shuts up about switching to linux. Its pretty obvious that the majority of people on /. have never been involved with large organizations and the 10+ year development chains that you often run into when making choices about what you can, and cannot do with computers for that organization.

      Using Windows SAVED the taxpayers money in this situation. I'll say that a little more firmly than YrWrstNtmr did, because its absolutely true. "Ahh, what a tangled web we weave" is very true of large organizations, who, over time, work, re-work, custom interfaces, databases, apps, etc., into such a web of interdependency, that you'd have to be DEVOTED, no, more like FERVENTLY in support of using linux to want to even begin to consider touching those interdependencies.

    7. Re:Why Windows? Why not !!! by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would much rather have our government hire IT professionals that create OSS and implement it than outsourcing everything to private companies that use proprietary code.

      Let me fill you in on how it works. I can only speak to the USAF method, and not the Army, because that is what I have intimate knowledge of.

      Most custom apps are written in-house. Not contracted out, and certainly not contracted out to Microsoft. MS (and other vendors) provides the framework. Windows, Office, SQLServer, Oracle, etc. The actual applications are written in house. Either by one of the main software houses (1 for Air Combat Command (Langley AFB), and 1 for Air Mobility Command(Scott AFB)). Or in the case of small tools, maybe by a knowledgable user in the particular office. And there are a LOT of those. If the project gets big enough, it may get taken over by one of the aforementioned s/w houses.

      The USAF (ACC at least), had/has a "Self Help Lab'. An organization, in need of a tool/application, can send a couple of 'user-experts', and the guys teach them how to build and maintain their own code. I was the NCOIC of the first one of those at Langley.

      The USAF owns the code for all these applications. There is no 'proprietary code', owned by an outside vendor for these tools. Does the USAF have the source code for MSProject? No. Does it matter? Again, no. If MS decides to make Project2004 incompatible with Project2000...you have 2 choices. Don't buy 2004 and stay on your current version, or modify your custom app that sits on top of it (of which you DO have the code for). The exact same thing would happen with a app that had been outsourced in OSS. Don't upgrade or modify.

      Sure...some things get outsourced. But guess what? Quite often, the source code is part of the deal! And can be maintained/modified, in house, forever and ever.

      Be it a custom app on top of MSProject, or an aircrew medical records screening process, or a training munition distribution application...the USAF already owns and has posession of the code, to modify at will.

      Although OSS is not easy to use, it can be. An easy to use interface is just that, an interface. It is evolutionary. Things become easier to use overtime with advances in technology.

      And only just now are OSS tools becoming viable. Even just a year or two ago, Linux as the base, and all OSS tools on top of that, was not a viable prospect.

      Microsoft unfortunately tried to go for ease-of-use before having a strong foundation. They did more harm to the IT industry than most people realize.

      On that we agree. And eventually, we will dig ourselves out of this hole. Once a complete end to end alternate is available. The penguin is almost there, but not quite.

      The military CIO's are not stupid people. On the contrary, quite intelligent. And VERY budget oriented. Just because they have not so far chosen to switch to Linux does not mean it isn't being considered. Very closely.

      How many 500,000 person, global companies have made the desktop switch to Linux? How many have considered it, and put it on the shelf for later, when more/better tools are available?

  216. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

    Backing up Pocket PC/ActiveSync.
    Extras on DVD.
    All things work related (SQL Server/VB/Crystal Reports)
    Sites that use ActiveScript.

    and I have a feeling that Redhat 9 isn't going to like my USB mouse or the USB memory stick reader I might get.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  217. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Gsus411 · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the tip! Shweet!

  218. It's obvious what this is about... by rulethirty · · Score: 1

    C'mon guys, you know the reason for all this is finding better ways to waste your tax money. *sigh*, Tax dollars going towards Microsoft through a re-seller. Someone over at the army needs to hook these machines up with Lindows or some cheap or possibly free opensource alternative... Aye, but it's all about the money, and the fact that Micro$oft has plenty or pursuading powers...

  219. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1
    According to the recent IRC interview, approximately half Slashdot viewers use IE.

    A common problem is the use of NTLM authentication on work proxies, or the inability to install new software.

    There is also the issue of people requiring IE for their intranets, and a lot of people simply cannot be bothered using two browsers at once.

  220. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

    Don't Know about the USB mouse but the memory stick is no problem

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  221. Did [Linux company] bid on this contract? by Cthefuture · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, did Redhat or any of the other big Linux players bid on this contract (IBM?)?

    If not, then shame on them. Maybe they didn't know the deal was going down, but often these RFP's are public information.

    That money would have gone a long, long ways towards making Linux the best OS out there. It's almost there now and just about any current distro would work fine, but that money could've been used to quickly fix any minor problems still plaguing Linux (eg. get rid of all text based config tools). As others have mentioned, they could've hired on the best Linux developers available to make everything 100% perfect. I don't think that little extra development would've taken any extra time out of their current schedule and would create jobs for many people along with increasing security, decreasing M$'s monopoly, and bettering open-source as a whole.

    As well...

    --
    The ratio of people to cake is too big
    1. Re:Did [Linux company] bid on this contract? by Cthefuture · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Er, hate to reply to my own message but I hit the damn submit button...

      I believe that if it's at all possible, government money should be used to benefit the general population. Funding open-source projects is a good way to get the job done and benefit the tax payers as well. This project would've been perfect for that.

      Instead the money just goes to fund the richest corporation in the world.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
    2. Re:Did [Linux company] bid on this contract? by Dan+Crash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For that kind of money, why isn't the Army creating their OWN Linux distro? They could've started with the NSA's security-enhanced Linux and customized it from there. A half-billion dollars ought to be enough to build an operating system that would make OS X look like DOS. (Actually, I imagine it would cost much less to create their own distro -- perhaps only 10% of the Microsoft deal.)

      What's more, the Army would have total access to the code, they could make changes as needed, and they'd never have to spend another dime on OS licenses.

      I can't see any way that this deal makes sense. What a waste. Until I hear better, I'm considering this theft by cronyism.

      --
      He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
    3. Re:Did [Linux company] bid on this contract? by reverendslappy · · Score: 1

      Even if they did, I doubt they'd have won the deal anyway.

      $497,000,000 for licensing systems that were likely already MS anyway is a decent chunk of change. But tack on all the other hidden costs of migrating to any other OS (training, infrastructure rebuild, application remediation, swing assets, etc.) and it'd be closer to a billion dollar cost.

      You have to consider all the variables here. While it'd be great to see some big money make it into OSS pockets, going with Linux just wouldn't the smart fiscal move for DoD to make, especially in tough economic times.

      Be patient though... As Linux continues to mature, OSS will win a big one at some point, and I'm looking forward to it. At the same time, don't hold your breath... in today's economy trying to sell a cash-strapped enterprise on a complete desktop migration ain't easy.

    4. Re:Did [Linux company] bid on this contract? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Main Entry: capÂiÂtalÂism
      Pronunciation: 'ka-p&-t&l-"iz-&m, 'kap-t&l-,
      British also k&-'pi-t&l-
      Function: noun
      Date: 1877

      : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

    5. Re:Did [Linux company] bid on this contract? by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      The US government is not a corporation, it's a public entity. By the people, for the people?

      Traditionally much of what the government does is public information. Lots of research and other items are freely available to US citizens, including some military information.

      The Internet was originally a public funded government project.

      If you're a US citizen then that's your tax money going to Microsoft. Would you rather it go there or go to an open-source project that actually benefits the public at large? It's public money why shouldn't it directly benefit the public?

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
    6. Re:Did [Linux company] bid on this contract? by Faux_Pseudo · · Score: 1
      quickly fix any minor problems still plaguing Linux (eg. get rid of all text based config tools).

      Excuse me?
      Text based configuration tools aren't the problem. More often than not they are the solution. You can build them fast and flexible in a way that no GUI can match. And fixing them does not mean "get rid" of them. If you did that then configuring X after a new video card install might be a bit hard. Don't you think?

      The problem isn't text based tools. It is normally people unwilling to learn. You ever try to admin a mass of systems via your home 150 miles from away from them over a slow network/hardware? Text based tools are the answer.
      Ever needed to automate something on the fly? Text based tools are the answer.

      And if something is wrong with the config tool then you are better able to track what it is if it is a text based tool. Helping you fix the problem instead of just kicking the machine. You may have checked the right boxes but did the GUI do the right thing in response? Unless you open up the config file you may never know. After a while of useing text based tools instead of GUI ones[0] you begin to wonder how you ever lived without them and you learn a lot more about the system so that when something does go wrong you know what /exactly/ the problem is and how to fix it. GUIs hide it all from you.

      They aren't broken. They are the salvation for getting real work done, done right, done fast.

      They aren't the end all be all but they are most definetly not a "problem" Please THINK then POST.

      [0] and as a an added bonus they don't need to be rewritten every time there is an upgrade to the widgets. They don't require massive library dependancies and they are fast, small, stable and stand alone even years after they are written.

  222. support contracts by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 1

    While on face value, yes, that's true, how will any company ever be able to compete *ever* when huge contracts are only handed out to huge companies? This is classic chicken/egg. I've got a strong gut feeling that if redhat had landed a $490 million dollar six year contract they damn sure would be around in 6 years, and be much stronger for it. That type of taxpayer money going to continually aid a company which has been recently found in violation of federal laws is decidedly poor judgement. Would spending somewhat more on open source packages be a better use of taxpayer money? Yes. Notice I said 'spend more' - Move it to 500 million. Or 600 million. That would be money which would be more easily returned back to the community which would have a more positive knock off effect for a broader segment of society, not just MS shareholders.

  223. Let's keep Pentagon spending in perspective! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Hey,
    While we're whining about US military propping up M$ with a cool 500 mil, let's not forget the pentagon can't account for 2.3 trillion dollars of taxpayer money!

    "Its own auditors admit the military cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends"

    They have know idea where it goes (or secretly know but won't disclose!)

    Source:
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/ 29/eveningn ews/printable325985.shtml

  224. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problems with Windows today have more to do with Microsoft's hopelessly corrupt corporate culture than anything to do the OS. Microsoft over the years seems to have completely lost the ability to even think in terms of honest competition and succeeding through excellence -- it has become a kind of mafia.

    It they: (A) straightened out their security problems, and (B) stopped ruining software by going for the customer 'lock in', it would be a pretty good product. Alas, I expect the second point will never happen ...

  225. write by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    write you representivities at how appalled you are at this. tell them your concerns that at a time of finincial hards ships, they are pay a 1/2 a billion dollars for something that could be done for at least half that.
    write your news papers. When the public finds out that the Army is wasting this kind of money when there children are have school days cut, and programs slashed from undernieth them. Write every newspaper you can think of, large and small. Make this an issue.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:write by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      It would have cost them more to use linux. Posts like this perpetuate the myth that the desktop somehow exists in its own independent world, free to randomly switch its OS when it chooses.

      In large companies, that have years of custom work on certain platforms, you can't just walk in and format the desktops. Its not that simple.

    2. Re:write by MrPink2U · · Score: 1

      Well you could, but I don't think it would be a good idea. :-)

      I am not directly involved with the desktop group here at my company, but I know that they have a huge infrastructure setup to maintain our desktops. It wasn't built overnight and changing over to another OS wouldn't be a menial task.

      Let's see what hidden costs we can dig up...

      How about bringing the current desktop support personnel up to speed on another OS? (They would have to know both for a small period of time during the cutover).

      How about the re-building, or at least tweaking of the current support structure? (Patches, updates, remote management, software installation...)

      How about training everyone in the US Army to use the new OS, as well as the new applications? (logging in, email, web)

      How about porting the Core Army Applications to run on the new OS? (payroll, supply system, maintenance system, etc.)

      There are more variables in the equation than the sticker price. They made their decision long ago to be a "Windows Shop".

    3. Re:write by reverendslappy · · Score: 1

      You couldn't be more correct. In enterprise environments, Linux has some major hurdles to jump to try to compete for large-scale conversion contracts. ANY conversion from Operating System X to Operating System Y at the desktop is tremendously expensive, regardless of what the OSes involved are. For that reason, the Linux camp is going to need to find a more convincing sell than "the OS is cheaperâ if they ever want to land deals like this one. The other thing to keep in mind is that for a Microsoft ELA, $950/PC isn't terrible. It likely has Software Assurance as a component, which saves money long-term anyway... It's a 6-year deal, and it's $950 in today-dollars, and will probably buy them upgrades and support at little-to-no cost through the duration of the agreement. (though that's speculation on my part) And to all you OSS apostles out there, these licenses likely apply to machines that are already Windows (more speculation), so I don't really see this as a huge defeat for OSS. But I think it's time for a reality check: Convincing large enterprises to switch to Linux at the desktop is a ridiculously tough sell, and you'd be wise not to get your hopes up every time a MS contract comes up for renewal. Instead of blindly proselytizing the surface benefits of Linux, the OSS community would be better served by creating and demonstrating ease and cost-efficiency of migrating to Linux from Windows at the enterprise desktop. Because as it is now, the cost of renewing a Microsoft ELA is ludicrously lower than the cost of an enterprise-wide migration to Linux. Though Iâ(TM)m not a Microsoft fan, this decision doesnâ(TM)t bother me at all. $497,000,000 over six years is probably less than half of what a Linux migration of that size would cost.

  226. You must have your head in the sand.... by SecGreen · · Score: 1

    or somewhere else if you think that MS doesn't do well in the enterprise environment.

    As for scalability and transaction processing, MS Currently hold the record for TPC-C Non-clustered, TPC-H, and TPC-W...

    The following folks might be offended that you don't consider them "enterprises", (especially Enterprise Rent-a-car):

    1&1 Internet AG
    Alta Resources
    Analog Devices, Inc. (ADI)
    Austrian Ministry of the Interior
    Avanade
    Bank of New York
    Belgian Federal Public Service of Foreign Affairs
    CIGNA Corporation
    City of Hamburg, Information Technology Office
    Clalit Health Services
    Cornell Theory Center
    Digex
    Eka Chemicals
    Enterasys Networks
    Enterprise Rent-A-Car
    GE Medical Systems
    GMAC Commercial Mortgage
    GoldQuest International Ltd
    Honeywell
    Infospace, Inc.
    Interland
    Intrawest
    Inventure Solutions Inc.
    JetBlue Airways
    Johns Hopkins
    Kentucky Department of Education
    LexisNexis Group
    Liberty Medical Supply
    LifeCenter Northwest
    London Stock Exchange
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
    MEI Hotels
    Mercator Bank & Insurances Group
    Motorola, Inc.
    Ocean Spray
    PFE International
    QUALCOMM
    Qwest
    Rackspace Managed Hosting
    Reuters
    Safeway, Inc.
    Saks Incorporated
    Sandvik
    Siemens
    SmartPipes, Inc.
    Sony Ericsson
    Steelpoint Technologies
    Tesco.com
    The Space Needle Corporation
    Timex
    U.S. Air Force Standard Systems Group (SSG)
    UNX, Inc. (Universal Network Exchange)
    WebCentral
    WestAmerica Mortgage Company

    Link to the Microsoft Marketting Machine where I scammed this list

    --
    Dupe posts are /.'s tacit protest on the rights of users to time-shift content...
    1. Re:You must have your head in the sand.... by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

      Alright, I fess up... I *do* have my head in the sand. But let's look at the Enterprise Rent-a-Car situation. Without Windows Server 2003, with terminal services, it wouldn't go. Which means that MS FINALLY has a solution. Of course SUN Rays have been around for years. We will see how this installation fairs. I'll keep an eye on how they do, and how MS does. A problem may be that machines cannot be consolidated. We'll see.

      Ratboy

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  227. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hotplugging makes USB a snap. On my slackware box anyway, my memory stick shows up as a scsi device. Mount it and away you go ... Even my Logitech USB quickcam pro 3000 was found using the default install kernel. Woot! Linux (and slackware) has come a long way!

  228. yes, it's too hard by Burz · · Score: 1

    Likely scenario:

    1. Download foo RPM and install
    1a. Wrangle with dependencies for RPM
    1b. Finish install

    2. Where's the ICON?

    Hello?

    3. Sit back with an icecoffee and realize this is the tip of the iceberg.

    This has more to do with the intelligence of distribution authors than the users.

  229. Yes they did pay.. by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

    $700.00 for a hammer.. $250 for the hammer $350 for spare parts and The rest for a Maintentance Contract

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  230. I'm an Army Sysadmin by The+Evil+Couch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I fully agree, most of my users have serious problems just operating windows, let alone doing work on it. If you threw Linux at them, they would just stop using the computer and go back to doing everything on paper.

    another thing is that while the liscense costs for all the software that they're getting isn't horrible price-gouging, we don't fucking need it.

    I'm in an officer school, the only function for having a database is for keeping track of student information. I already have an access database in place with an oracle database slowly replacing it. I don't need or want SQL and NONE of my users need it, either. we don't need to buy a shit load of liscenses at slightly above prices, what we need is to break that chunk of cash up and give it to the units so that their Sysadmins and IMOs can determine what the unit needs.

    I'll give you a little story as an example of how trying to add too many pieces to the puzzle WILL fuck up a supply chain:
    earlier this year, I needed 14 computers. I sat down and figured out the paperwork bullshit and forms for it (I'm actually Infantry and have zero training for admin stuff). I priced out how much it would cost for what we needed and found several retailers that we could go through. I sent that stuff up to higher and after about 2 months of that paperwork going through commitee and bueracracy, I got 14 computers that were totally different from what I requested, cost more, lacked software liscenses and hardware that my users needed for them to do their jobs.

    anyone higher than brigade levels has no fucking clue what a battalion needs, and even then they don't really know.

    this whole package for stuff we don't need irritates me.

    1. Re:I'm an Army Sysadmin by FeloniousPunk · · Score: 1

      I'm in an officer school, the only function for having a database is for keeping track of student information. I already have an access database in place with an oracle database slowly replacing it. I don't need or want SQL and NONE of my users need it, either. we don't need to buy a shit load of liscenses at slightly above prices, what we need is to break that chunk of cash up and give it to the units so that their Sysadmins and IMOs can determine what the unit needs.
      Next time you run into a situation like that, thank the US Congress. The reason you can't just go out and get that good deal on exactly the machines you need is because of the arcane purchasing regulations courtesy of the Congress. You see, to you you are just a clerk at some unit trying to get some computers you need to do your job. But to the business community, you are an agent of the US government. And all of those other people who you could have bought computers from but didn't, well, they're mad because an institution they pay for with their taxes didn't even give them a fair look. So, for the government to buy anything, it has to go through very complex purchasing regulations that ensure that purchases (at least those above a certain level) are competed for, competitors know the government's need before hand, etc. This is to keep things "fair." Actually, there is a lot more to it, but thinking about it makes my head hurt so I'm going to stop. I deal with this stuff too much as it is, both when I was in the Army and now as a government contractor.
      Here's a story that sheds some light on how absurd it can get. Once upon a time in Germany, I got named the Field Ordering Officer (FOO) on an exercise and I was authorized to make emergency purchases of things we might need that were critical to the exercise, obtainable locally, but couldn't get it in time through the Army supply system. It was very cold and wet and out battalion HQ got set up in an extremely muddy place. So the colonel tells me, go out to a farm and buy a few truckloads of straw, so we can put it down on the ground in the tents.
      This was harder than you might think. Most of the farmers in the area didn't have any to spare at that time of year, but finally I found one guy who, as it happens, sold straw to the German army base nearby. So we did the deal, paid him lots of cash, and then drove up 2 5 ton trucks to get all the straw and loaded it up. Well, a week later, the colonel decides he needs more. The only problem is, the regulations forbade me from buying from the same guy twice since it would show government favoritism toward one supplier, something that's forbidden for purchases of this nature. He was the only guy in the area who had any! So the farmer called his brother, he came along, and then we "bought" the straw from the brother. Totally absurd and divorced from reality on the ground, but there it is.

      --
      I know this because Tyler knows this.
    2. Re:I'm an Army Sysadmin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      similar note I was at Brigade headquarters in the S4 (supply) as a clerkin 1994 my desktop was a top of the line 486DX4 for writing papers on. I finally was transfered to a line company (I am and was a rifleman) I get thier and the supply sergeant asks me to help get his computer working. I walked in and triped over the 8088, (monochrome screen 5 1/4 floppys (1 boot 1 data)and all the museumwar to boot) it took me 2 months and a lot of looting of software cabneits discards but it was working when I was done ...

  231. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Yort · · Score: 2, Funny
    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    Work.

    Wife.

  232. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that we wanna blow up

    Fuck you.

    when the controller computer BSOD's

    What makes you think the controller would be running Windows?

  233. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will do the same thing open sores software will do when it kernal panics.

  234. Bull mared by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Any company with two brain sells buy the msdn subscription with sever aliscense for much less money.

    whats the point if making things for lars if you are only going to specify "I want windows"? If they said "I want a OS with a GUI tha can run an office sweet that support open standards" now you have competition for a product, and thau LARS amke sense.

    It is a sale in that the Softmart sales people pushed to be the chosen LAR. wether youir sell ing a service or a product, your still selling. which is fine, but a rose by any other name is still a rose.

    Te military made a BAD move by getting further locked into a proprietary system when they do not have to be. whether or not is Microsoft is an other issue, I just think it is the resposibility of the government to maintain as much openess as transparency as possible.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Bull mared by FateCreatr · · Score: 1

      i hope you're not a rep for a reseller, because your clients are going to get in a bit of trouble if they take your advice. the MSDN sub only gives them right to use the applications for testing and developement, except in the case of VStudio and Visio. also, MSDN is yearly and would be much more expensive and harder to administer since you have to claim all specific end users, not end user machines up front. yes Softmart was choosen to be the LAR but 9 times out of 10 all the LAR does is intoduce MS to the client and start the negociations. then they are out of it. the military could have said, "no we want Zones, or SoftChoice" or someone like that, but the end deal would be identicle. i would be willing to bet that Softmart is recieving a much lower commision rate on this one too. normaly it's about 2-3%, but i would think this one would be under 1%.

    2. Re:Bull mared by afidel · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can't run production boxes on MSDN liscenses. Read the liscense some time and figure out what you get, basically the ability to run the software in a lab environment and access to the detailed information and a certain number of help requests per anum.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  235. You're saying they should have nationalized Corel? by VT_hawkeye · · Score: 1

    Personally, I'd prefer the government not take over private companies. Besides, Corel is Canadian, and I'd imagine the Canadian government might have something to say about that.

  236. uhhhh, open source can't be classified... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give me a break. Linux is Open Source, anything developed with open source has to stay open source - hence nothing could be classified.

    Christ, not everything is a corporate-pandering conspiracy theory.

    1. Re:uhhhh, open source can't be classified... by notque · · Score: 4, Funny

      Christ, not everything is a corporate-pandering conspiracy theory.

      Or is that what they want us to beileve.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    2. Re:uhhhh, open source can't be classified... by mink · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually if the Military doesn't re-distribute whatever GPL software they modify to the outside they can clasify and close off the software all they want.

      But dont let that get in the way of your conspiracy theory that open software gets in the way of government spooks.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  237. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called wireless networking, and Linux is a biotch to set up with my pcmcia network card.

  238. Jebus Crispt by bogie · · Score: 1

    What a waste of money. As a taxpayer who actually ends up footing the bill for this I continue to be outraged that opensource alternatives aren't mandated when possible. The government has a duty to reduce costs whenever possible and this is a perfect example of where they could have done that, yet went with the status quo. Its simply Un-American to waste money like this when there are other options. Not to mention Opensource software has a vastly superior track record when it comes to security, let alone stability.

    Sure, use the best tool for the job, but there exists open source alternatives for all the software they are using. The fact that the MS rep had the balls to say this deal "validates the Army's belief in our security model." makes me want to puke. Those billions of dollars lost evey year due to viruses...that is DIRECTLY because of shoddy MS software. When it comes to security, MS is the joke of the industry. Just now are they shipping a server OS that is somewhat secure by default. Of course their client OS is still a hackers delight. When IE and Outlook are involved you simply can't have secure computing. Can't wait till the next version of Klez or whatever hits. Oh and it WILL happen.

    Anyway enough rambling. This deal stinks and for all the current governments talk about reducing expenses this is a prime example of how some things never change.

    Maybe some people will consider this post a generic response to a situation where OpenSource has lost out to MS in a deal, but I'd say its the businesses and groups whocontinue to blindy by MS software who are the ones that are losing out.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  239. Oxymoron by Adelvillar · · Score: 1

    Military Intelligence... yeah!

    --
    "In God we trust, all others must bring data" - W. Edwards Deming
  240. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Canon Scanner. Those Linux-haters.

  241. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Otherwise, I'd kiss this winbloze parition goodbye.

  242. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by DigitalJEM · · Score: 1

    This is very true and I fully agree with you.

    --
    -Joshua
  243. those damn Reds by kipple · · Score: 1

    Of course the US army will get Microsoft software! It's clear that linux is communism! [quoting Steve Ballmer]

    --
    -- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
  244. US Army, LLC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They don't need to be a corporation - they can outsource anything, and often do.

  245. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by ckaminski · · Score: 1

    Doesn't the truism Wife == Work apply here?

  246. The OS is probably already paid for by ehiris · · Score: 1

    "$950 per computer this clearly involves more than just the OS"

    9.5$/cal and if the system accesses 100 other systems on the network there you have your cost.

    You also have the option to be a loner. âoeThe army of oneâ could come in really handy.

  247. I've heard this one a million times... by Theatetus · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Could someone please tell me what's so friggin' "hard to use" about a distro like RedHat or Mandrake? Is it *that* hard to click on "have Disk Druid automatically partition for you"? Is it *that* hard to click on "automatically configure monitor"? Is it *that* hard to click on a big G-shaped foot rather than a green button labeled "start"? Honestly the only complaint I've had with the user-obsequious distros is trying to get a software modem to work.

    Honestly, I'm getting a little tired of this old saw. Unless you've got some seriously obscure hardware or a seriously obsolete distro, I just don't see what all the "difficulty" is.

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
    1. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Is it *that* hard to click on "have Disk Druid automatically partition for you"? Is it *that* hard to click on "automatically configure monitor"? Is it *that* hard to click on a big G-shaped foot rather than a green button labeled "start"?

      Yes.

    2. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by Mantorp · · Score: 1

      OK, hardware detection was no problem. Both Knoppix/Debian and Red Hat 9 detected everything marvelously (the reason I tried linux to begin with was my PC crashed badly and wouldn't boot to Windows or DOS so I used the Knoppix bootable cd to backup my files). What I had difficulties doing was getting the networking sorted out, and getting the ftp and webservers configured correctly. To be perfectly honest I'm lazy and time was an issue. Actually, it took me longer to get the hardware configured correctly in Windows but once that got sorted the networking and server setup was a snap.

    3. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by JudicatorX · · Score: 1

      Last time I *tried* to make an install, disk druid replied "can't set partition table". And that was that. Indeed, I've tried so hard to get a linux setup to work, but for me, but it never manages to work.

      Can someone explain to me how the setup program detects the mouse and the keyboard automatically and successfully, but yet when the OS finally boots, the mouse won't work, and pressing a key on the keyboard locks the machine??? Yes, I've had this happen. And I've had more trouble than enough with autodetecting mice. And *really* don't get me started about how when you restart a machine that's got a fresh install it won't boot again, *ever*, until you wipe the OS and reinstall.

      Hell, I've tried RH 7.1, 7.3, 8, Debian, god forbid even Caldera, but all of them have failed in some way or another, repeatedly (but not consistently, mind you).

      --
      "It is a good divine that follows his own instructions" - Portia, The Merchant of Venice
    4. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rather than a green button labeled "start"?

      Heh. Windows XP user, eh?

    5. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by Mantrid · · Score: 1

      How about "Is *that* hard to find software you want?"

      Yes.

    6. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by JesterXXV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What's hard about it, you ask? It's different. Since before Windows 95 I've grown accustomed to expecting certain behaviors from my OS and it's UI. This includes everything from window behavior to more complicated stuff like setting up a network.

      Am I just curmudgeonly? Maybe, but I also just haven't had a) the time or b) the motivation to spend time getting used to all of these factors. In a certain sense, I'm betting that the more hardcore Windows users find it more difficult to switch than the less experienced users, simply because certain expectations have become so innate that even the slightest difference requires a significant effort to get used to.

      --
      Yo mama so fake, she failed the Turing Test.
    7. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess M$ employees have nothing better to do than troll this thread.
      Thanks to the fact that most of my computing needs fall under:
      1) www browsing
      2) email
      3) coding
      I don't need anything from a second rate software company like M$. If one needs to play games go buy a game machine. If you actually need something that only M$ can provide - well, I pity you.
      And as far as having problems installing/booting RH or any other current distro - if you don't understand how to partition a disk, set a hostname and determine an IP address then how the h*ll do you survive even in a point-an-click world? More importantly, if you don't understand these concepts why the h*ll are you here at this site?
      Go back to your homepage (probably MSN because you don't know how to change it...) and look at all the pretty pictures.
      hehehe

    8. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by JesterXXV · · Score: 1

      Everyone who read this is now stupider.

      Seriously, why does my mom need to know shit about partitions, hostnames, or IPs to use word processing (a point-and-click-and-type world)?

      --
      Yo mama so fake, she failed the Turing Test.
    9. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by tuba_dude · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I got hooked on DOS (and MS products after that) since I was six (14 years ago). I think I qualify as a hardcore Windows user... Sorry, qualified...I switched last year. The hardest part about switching was learning how to use google for information. networking not working? Easy, go to the nearest working machine (library, in my case) and get more info. Your window behaviour argument is a little off tho. Gnome and KDE windows both react almost exactly like Windows, and if they aren't close enough, you can change them with (usually) pre-installed tools.

      The only person I know that couldn't 'get used to' a desktop linux distro was my mom, who had trouble using the computer if the "My computer" icon wasn't in the corner.

      --
      "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
    10. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by rifter · · Score: 1

      So why did you not give her one? It would not have been difficult to add a "My Computer" icon that launched a file browser to the desktop...

    11. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by tuba_dude · · Score: 1

      Oh damn. You're right. I was *this* close to having a new linux user, and I ruined it. Oh well, back to figuring out why a purple monkey is shitting all over her windows box.

      --
      "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
    12. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by JesterXXV · · Score: 1
      I am absolutely not saying it is impossible to get used to. All I'm saying is that it takes time and effort, which is not something everybody who WANTS to switch has.

      I realize Gnome and KDE are very similar to Windows, but to feel completely comfortable in them, a hardcore Windows user must either reconfigure everything to their liking (which takes a little bit of time) or get used to the new setup (which also takes a little bit of time).

      I'm about the same age as you, and have been using windows for about as long (hell, I still remember parkdisk). But, like most people, I am lazy and resistant to change. Why bother switching when I am comfortable where I am? Why screw around with actually LEARNING something about networking when I can just let Windows figure it out for me?

      Humans abhor change. I'm not saying it's right, or a Good Thing, but it's understandable.

      For the sake of learning and wisdom and partaking in the big mind-altering bong hit that is open-source, I plan on getting RH9 running as my primary OS sometime this summer. Hell, probably this weekend.

      Fuck it, I'M DOING IT TONIGHT!!!

      --
      Yo mama so fake, she failed the Turing Test.
    13. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by f0rt0r · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I was pretty hardcore in 2000-2001, after using Windows from version 1.0 up to 2000, getting my MCSE, and getting a job as a full-time Windows network administrator. But, in 2002 I started looking at other OS's, longing for something that gave me more control, more stability, wasn't so insecure, and didn't require so many patches to remain "current". Anyhow, played with FreeBSD first, loved everything except for the lack of hardware support, so I played with Linux( running it in VMWare for a few months ), and by September of 2002 I was ready to make the switch.

      It does take time to get used to, but the stability, freedom, and the sheer number of applications out there hooked me big time. I have come to the conclusion that asking someone to spend at least as much time learning Linux as they did learning Windows before judging if it is the OS for them or not. I was dual-booting a lot for games until a few weeks ago, and now I even got that problem solved. So, put some effort into it, don't try making it your main box right away as you will probably get frustrated and give up. Instead, do dual boot, virtual machine, or a cheap separate computer to experiment and learn on. Need help? Web sites like linuxquestions.org and tldp.org have answers to most questions, I haven't been impressed with linux books, but the "man" command ( get it? "the man" ) command has gotten me quick help when I was in a bind.

      I hope this helps put things into perspective a bit.

      --
      I can't afford a sig!
    14. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by JesterXXV · · Score: 1

      That's good know. Thanks for the advice - I actually do have a RH 7.3 partition on this box, but kinda got bored with it. I'm gonna install RH9, but i'm gonna need a weekend probably to get it all working, seeing as how I need my box to serve as a DHCP server for my parent's computer (no, I'm not in their basement - I am upstairs, thank you very much).

      Thanks for the website links. Oh, I have a question: what distro would you recommend? I'm just doing rh because I have a friend who's using it and can probably help me out, but if there's something of higher quality out there, i'd certainly like to know!

      --
      Yo mama so fake, she failed the Turing Test.
    15. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Hehe. That's ironic -- server and network configuration has probably given me the *most* problems in Windows. Back with NT 4.0, I needed multiple network profiles to deal with moving my computer around, which couldn't be done. Disabling interfaces consistently resulted in a wrong routing table, and I ended up having to remove drivers.

      And Apache is the easiest thing in the world to get up and running -- when I needed to set up IIS to do a couple of relatively basic things, all hell broke loose. Somehow, it lost the ability to log into the "web user account" that IIS runs as, and doing some (admittedly oddball) auth stuff took about a week to figure out.

    16. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Oh, I have a question: what distro would you recommend?

      I'd default to RH if you don't have a personal preference, just because the larger number of users tend to result in software that's best tested for it. Also, RH isn't going anywhere for years to come. It's also got the best support when it comes to that occasional rare binary-only package.

      OTOH, if you have other strong preferences, you might follow them. If you're really into having a purely "Free" system, you might try out Debian, which has probably the best in-distro support for remote downloading and instllation, but tends to be less user-friendly. Gentoo is the same thing, less popular support, more modern. Mandrake and SuSE both aimed at desktop distros more...I'd recommend Mandrake over SuSE if you get a chance. Mandrake is probably better than Red Hat if you prefer KDE to GNOME. PLD tends to be very bleeding-edge, which might be your cup of tea.

    17. Re:I've heard this one a million times... by Mantrid · · Score: 1

      Hey, guess what Mr. AC Troll, some people actually use their computers for more than pr0n!

  248. Isn't Dubya looking for campaign money? by _Eric · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Guess the name of a software company who will fund King George II'campaign?

  249. Stipulation on the version? by evil-osm · · Score: 1

    I sure hope there was some sort of stipulation as to what versions of Windows they would be getting on these systems. XP is ok for now, but 6 years from now? :(

    --


    E.

    Never rub another man's rhubarb - The Joker
  250. Re:Can't you see? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For one, read this link on NSAKEY, somebody who actually knows about that which he speaks:

    http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-9909.html #N SAKeyinMicrosoftCryptoAPI

    Second, why aren't you complaining about Microsoft's competitors donating money to the Democrats to buy an anti-trust trial?

  251. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

    Sure, I hang on to it for the hn210w driver, among other things.

  252. Three words.. by mysterious_mark · · Score: 1

    Waste, fraud and abuse. This type of situation is infortunately quite common in DoD, harks back to the $600 hammer. Unfortunatley you're tax dollors which are supposed to be for defense end up going to corporate welfare. DoD has turned into the largest barrel of pork/corporate welfare in the USA. MM

  253. wrong slant by ChristTrekker · · Score: 1

    Some friends and I decided that \. more accurately describes the slant, though.

    1. Re:wrong slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll use my mod on the fly ability here and say "-1 Bullcrap"

      Like you have friends.

  254. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    Work.

    Wife.

    Wireless.

    Winmodem.

  255. The Canadian government pays twice too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They buy PCs with the M$ OS installed (Top tier stuff like Dell, compaq, HP, etc.)
    *AND*
    They have a license agreement with M$ that covers ALL PCs, old and new.

    I asked around and I was told it's because they can find (or won't ask for) PCs without an OS. (Laptops especially!)

    And you know M$ does not honour the clause in the EULA for returning un-used software and giving your money back!

    Maybe our governments have less power than we are lead to believe...

  256. First the Army then the rest will follow by NetNinja · · Score: 1

    This deal is a lot bigger when you consider all the other armed forces are going to need to be compatible with each other.
    The Air Force will be next then the Navy then the Marine Corps will probably use Linux because we kick more ass on 25 Cents and give you a dime back because we care to send the very best.

  257. In by Shutup+Now · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Russia, Windows owns you!! uh, wait a minute...

    1. Re:In by GoneGaryT · · Score: 1

      Yay! Mod parent up!

  258. Eschelons above reality by Infonaut · · Score: 4, Insightful
    anyone higher than brigade levels has no fucking clue what a battalion needs, and even then they don't really know.

    Amen to that. When I was an Infantry officer I encountered the same thing. I figured, "Hey, in the *real* world of Corporate America, things must be more efficient. After all, since everyone is trying to save or make money, nobody will put up with this sort of wasteful bullshit. There are no Mad Minutes in Corporate America. There's no federal accounting that forces you to spend it or loose it.

    Then I started working in Corporate America, and found out that I was dead-wrong. Nobody literally gets on the firing line to blow off ammo before the fiscal year ends, but I've seen so many instances of ass-covering, ego driven "strategies" and just complete incompetence out here in the private sector. In fact, I've come to realize that while the Army's procurement system does suck ass through a straw, in many ways the overall efficiency of the Army (at least at the unit level) is far greater than that of most corporations.

    The military periodically gets nailed for million-dollar hammer episodes and the like, but believe me, staggering incompetence is not the exclusive domain of Uncle Sam.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
    1. Re:Eschelons above reality by FeloniousPunk · · Score: 1

      Then I started working in Corporate America, and found out that I was dead-wrong. Nobody literally gets on the firing line to blow off ammo before the fiscal year ends, but I've seen so many instances of ass-covering, ego driven "strategies" and just complete incompetence out here in the private sector. In fact, I've come to realize that while the Army's procurement system does suck ass through a straw, in many ways the overall efficiency of the Army (at least at the unit level) is far greater than that of most corporations.
      My experience exactly.

      --
      I know this because Tyler knows this.
    2. Re:Eschelons above reality by chia_monkey · · Score: 1

      The funny thing about it is how corporations never seem to really plan for the future. I also worked for a rather large multi-national corporation earlier in my career. Our tiny web team had a $5 million budget. Nuts I tell ya. "I need a new chair". Done. "I need a new optical mouse". Done. "I need Flash training." Done (I've never used it...I just wanted to go). Let's not forget all the free coffee and everything else (not that I'm complaining...I needed it)

      Uh oh! Economy slows down. Curb the spending? Nahhh. We'll just lay people off. We could have maintained a nice robust team had we not blown all that money on other things. I've since left the company and look at the site every now and then. Sad...

      It comes down to policies, wherever you are. I'm still stinging from that one article I read about the school not able to receive FREE Macs because the policy was to buy MS products...

      --

      "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
  259. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Zeriel · · Score: 1

    RedHat 9 works just fine with the USB mice I've used with it, the wheel even works all teh time (which is more than I can say for Logitech's Win2k drivers, grumblemutter.)

    --
    "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
  260. The power of money! by Shwag · · Score: 1

    ARE YOU KIDDING ME!?!

    Do you understand how nice and customized a system the government could have if they put $471 million into personalizing their linux desktop ?

    To give you an idea, Redhat, the leading linux distribution, as a company puts about $10 million into R&D each year.

  261. Good Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially in light of the fact that *BSD is DYING.

  262. Re:Paying twice? -MAYBE by OrangeGoo · · Score: 1

    Yep, the Army is a business, but I bet Dell would classify it as "Government" just like they do the local universities, and give them that package (which also includes the option to ship without an OS, if I'm not mistaken). Still, the Army is a business. We're constantly reminded that we have to make our customers happy (and in my particular branch of things, the customers are the people who would die if the dam broke ;)).

  263. MS$ Reflection by MSenhanced · · Score: 1

    So instead of creating jobs in research and development we are giving loads of money to a known abusive monopoly holder who will most likely use it to put good people out of work.

    Isn't this what the US Army is anyway? They're just supporting a reflection of themselves.

    --
    I write sig's like I know what I'm talking about.
  264. Re:Paying twice? -MAYBE by IDIIAMOTS · · Score: 2, Informative

    Dell is perfectly happy to ship a business OS-less PC's if the business tells them they have a volume license deal with Microsoft. Just because the website makes you buy OS/Software for one PC doesn't mean a volume order for 1000's of PCs would work the same.

  265. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give it a rest. IE is the best software that has come out of Microsoft. I know that's not saying much, but give IE some credit...

  266. Just in by theendlessnow · · Score: 1

    [Seoul] After the successful air drop campaign used over Iraq, the US Army is at it again. This time, North Korea.

    "Out Windows 2K drop last year was very effective in desimating the enemy's computer usage.", a senior officer was overheard saying. "Now, armed with the extra potent power of WinXP, N. Korea should fall in half of the time."

    Microsoft also supports the idea. "WinXP is simply more robust than Windows 2000. It's a perfect deployment."

    The results of the air drop will take time admittedly, "but we can wait for the shock and awe of WinXP... they won't know what hit em." When asked why they didn't go with the even heavier Windows 2003 Server, he replied, "It just wasn't ready yet. Once we've seen it in action and can be assured of its potential for devestation, it will certainly be added to our arsenal."

    Initial figures for the arial bombardment are expect to be around $471 million.

  267. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  268. Man this PISSES ME OFF! by alchemist68 · · Score: 1

    Our government just keeps SPENDING and SPENDING and SPENDING. You'd think that with ALL the fricking PC's they purchase, The Borg would give a significant discount for bulk licenses. Well, it looks like we're back to the REPUBLICAN days of buying $400 hammers and toilet seats. I'd like to know where the money is REALLY going.

    IIRC, the NSA or CIA or someone developed a really secure version of Linux somewhere. Oh, wait, slap me in the head, it doesn't run OFFICE (BACK ORIFICE, remember that?). It's NOT COMPATIBLE. The only thing most military personnel need from OFFICE is a word processor and spreadsheet, two items that are FREELY available in OpenOffice.

    I can see this happening in the future:

    Congressional hearing: George dubya, did you participate in illegal money transfers?

    George dubya: I don't understand the question.

    Congressional hearing: George dubya, since the Coalition Forces didn't find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, did you pay the Saddam Hussein loyalists money using extra money set aside from an inflated Microsoft software purchase (a bribe) to hand over the nuclear weapons program the Iraqi scientists were working on?

    George dubya: I don't remember.

    George dubya later FAKES a diagnosis of alzheimer's disease are retires on a private ranch in Tixis (Hillbilly phonetics) and slips away from public scutiny and prosecution.

    Yup, uhuh, this is how it will happen. And I'm sure George dubya will get his little kick back too from the Borg leader.

  269. You can't be serious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your problem is that you're using a scene from a television show as a way to justify military overspending. Here's something to think about once you pull yourself away from the tube: ashtrays on subs? You're kidding, right? RIGHT?

  270. Nice Karma Stacking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well done indeed.

    1. Re:Nice Karma Stacking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like I needed it? I'm maxxed out.

  271. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

    First of all, switching cell phone providers is pretty hard in the US, because it means you end up with ANOTHER phone every time you switch (unless you're lucky...)

    As for Windows being a good OS, that was true, until 2000, when ME came out. 2000 was the last good version. AFAIR, the FBI actually issued security warnings against XP.

    BTW, this is posted with Opera on 2000. I know 2000 is a good OS.

  272. Maybe Where You Shop by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1
    At roughly $950 per computer this clearly involves more than just the OS

    But remember, we're talking about the U.S. military here. These are the same folks that'll cheerfully pay $400 for a hammer and $600 for a toilet seat.

    --

    I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

  273. about your .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Socialism != Communism.

    Most Socialists (like myself) are not Marxist Communists. Marx felt a central controlled body should direct the means of production to satisfy all needs equally.

    Social Democracts or Socalists believe that you should control the economy (or at least greatly (through many influences) stear-it) like any other item in your community; via Democracy. Using the Economy to make MORE people have BETTER lives is the goal of all Government, all Societies, all Communities. And, Socialism is a better method to assure the greatest benefit to the greatest numbers -- bottom line is that it is a more succesfull system. Look to Canada, Look to Western Eurpoe -- higher standard of living than the USA. And, when hubris and greed finally collapses in on the US rigged 'market economy' (how you like that %1 interest rate and MASSIVE debt?) you'll discover that the Russian Fascists only lost the cold war by collapsing FIRST -- the same is going to happen to the USA in the short to medium term... deflation, devaluation of the dollar, unmanagable debt, bankrupcy?

    1. Re:about your .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come now...

      Deflation is a cautionary tale because economists need to make headlines.
      Devaluation of the dollar with HELP the 'unmanageable' debt because our exports will be cheaper in foreign countries (ie, they'll buy more, and import less).
      Unmanageable debt is a misnomer, it's big but it's not destroying us.
      Bankruptcy, if you mean personal problems, that's personal problems. If people are stupid enough to max out multiple cards (I've known a few), tough luck.

      I also don't see the wonderful standard of living that is so much better in Canada (I'm from Buffalo, they're right across the way) or anywhere in Europe...

      Mod me as off-topic please, I just couldn't help myself. Oh wait, I can post anon. :)

  274. USE this information - HERE's HOW. by agslashdot · · Score: 1

    How many do you think know about this ?
    Yeah, the slashdot crowd.
    Yeah, the guys who read yahoo news and landed on this news snippet by chance.
    The "rest of America" = NO CLUE.

    What do you think will happen next ? MS will use this info bigtime. Within a week, you'll see huge ads on WSJ, NYT & every other print outlet, and every channel starting with MSNBC, CNN, FOX etc, telling the "rest of America" that the US Army endorses MS software. Immediately, retail customers will get on board. MSFT will zoom into stratosphere. When it can't go any further, institutions & mutual funds will dump MSFT, and the retail guys will get screwed as usual.

    I say, use this info. Go out NOW, sell your house and put every nickel into MSFT. Make huge profits, & then invest that into RHAT. Win-win situation.

  275. That's a good question... by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

    We have an agreement with MS that gives us unlimited OS and Office upgrades among other things. But it's a yearly contract, and the "other things" seem to change every year. If the military did lock in 6 years of free upgrades on a reasonably extensive suite of software, this may not be a bad deal.

    I do wish they'd gone open source though. They certainly have the leverage to tell their vendors that they'll only accept docs and software that conform to open standards.

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
  276. Great Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, this is a bargain for DOD and M$! All of the MS OS/Office items will include maintenance for 6 years @ $900. A centralized distribution will make things easier for everyone involved. Also, this will enable other DOD components to purchase using the same method.

    Windows XP Pro - $270.99
    Office XP Pro - $449.98

    Loading the OS and Office will net you $720.97 for the initial purchase. The remaining balance will provide you with $179.03 to buy upgrades for the next 6 years. Add to this the savings for such a group purchase (i.e. no duplicate purchases, budget planning at lower levels to upgrade software, etc.). Of course, the $700 story and ANY complaint about the government is an easier sell - save the wolf cries for meaningful change.

    Finally, the idea that the Army or any other agency simply buys normal consumer systems and duplicates the purchase is not true. Most agencies will buy models that do not include the OS or Windows due to the agreements like this one. Why do you think vendors have separate lines for government, business, and home users?

  277. crashing instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is Great News! US army will be rebooting the computers instead of killing!
    God bless America

  278. Luna by philg8 · · Score: 1

    War just got uglier, no thanks to the Luna interface.

  279. Reality Check by Cereal+Box · · Score: 2, Interesting

    First, as many other people have pointed out, these machines aren't being used in "life or death" situations, they're for normal desktop stuff. Did it ever occur to any of you that perhaps Windows does indeed provide a better desktop experience than your average Linux distro? Heresy, I know. Nothing could possibly be better than Linux. And BTW, for those of you repeating those tired "BSOD" jokes: have you used a version of Windows past 98 or what? Win2K and XP are pretty damn stable. A BSOD on either of them is about as likely as a kernel panic in Linux. Get over it, it's time to retire those BSOD jokes.

    Second, unless any of you have any real experience with the costs associated with outfitting an entity as large as the US Army with computers, I don't think you're qualified to make assumptions about how Linux "obviously" would've saved 50-90% of the cost. There's a saying in business that when you have people bidding on a contract you throw away the top N% (because they're ripping you off) and the bottom N% (lowballers -- they're obviously underestimating the cost of the job and are under-experienced) and pick among the people in the middle. Hmm, where do you think someone like Redhat would show up relative to other bidders? Furthermore, what makes you think that the Army didn't rule out Redhat (or whatever other "Linux support" company) primarily because they have shown NO history of being able to handle customers with needs as large as the Army? When was Redhat's last $470 million contract, hmm? Don't assume that they'd be up to the job of support just because MS can do it and anything MS can do Linux can do better.

    I mean really guys, come on. Don't let your seething hatred of MS blind you to realities of the situation. Maybe, just maybe, with all things considered MS was the better choice.

    1. Re:Reality Check by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      BSOD a joke? About as likely as kernel panic?

      How about a slightly new joke then?

      "I needed to replace the motherboards in two computers. The Linux computer booted up normally. The Windows computer BSODed! I tried again and it BSODed! I moved the harddrive to another system to try to get the Windows system I spent so much effort on back up, it BSODed. I use Linux now. HAHAHAHA"

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
    2. Re:Reality Check by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

      That's a hardware issue, not a Windows issue. Perhaps you didn't uninstall old drivers for hardware that existed on the old motherboard first and when you booted up an invalid hardware access was made. Who knows? Would you be slamming Linux is Linux had a kernel panic and Windows booted up properly? Somehow I doubt it.

    3. Re:Reality Check by CrosseyedPainless · · Score: 1

      That's a hardware issue, not a Windows issue.

      Well, if you needed proof that this clown works for Microsoft, I guess he just supplied it.

    4. Re:Reality Check by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

      No, I don't work for Microsoft. Did it ever occur to you that some people don't mindlessly bash operating systems, give them a chance, and come to realize their strengths and weaknesses? I wouldn't expect Windows to be able to function properly 100% of the time every single time one motherboard is swapped for an arbitrary one any more than I'd expect it to be able to handle hot-swapping two IDE hard drives. You couldn't make the same expectations of Linux either.

      It's funny though. You think MS crashing when a mobo was swapped out is sad (mine did just fine, of course), and I think Linux not being able to support many popular pieces of hardware is sad.

  280. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by DigitalJEM · · Score: 1

    Switching providers isn't hard at all.. It just costs money, but I wouldn't call it hard to call up a company and say 'activate this phone' and give them all your info. :D In any case, that wasn't the intent of my post. I was saying that you could go buy the phone, call up and have it activated. And for the most part you would know how to use the phone. If you switch OS's you have to basically learn a whole new language.

    --
    -Joshua
  281. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2, Funny
    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?
    Work.
    Wife. Pr0n.
  282. Get the details and then start bitching by Ride-My-Rocket · · Score: 1

    Unless you're speaking as an individual who is privy to the terms of the contract, stop jumping to conclusions. In all likeliness, the contract includes Windows, Office and support, at the very least. Never mind the fact that several of the Microsoft server applications require per-seat licenses, in addition to server licenses -- the Army could be factoring those into the purchases as well.

    At some point, you have to make the decision to stop pinching pennies and pay more for corporate-level services and applications. Yes, I'm sure the Army overspends aplenty, but I'm sure the service and support they get is pretty good, too.

  283. Which immediately brings to mind... by darketernal · · Score: 1

    http://pulz.no/files/fun_pics/guidance_software.jp g

    This scares me, it really does :)

  284. Re:To my american friends by forkboy · · Score: 1

    Yeah but the funny thing is, their tax bills are going to be lower so no one cares.

    So who's really the victim here? Social programs that rely on state grant money and donations which in turn comes from government grants to states. These grants are GREATLY reduced, causing most states to be in a fiscal crisis right now. Hence, programs like drug treatment centers, domestic violence shelters, homeless shelters, free medical clinics....those are all doing one of two things: Closing down or laying off staff. Both result in hurting the american public.

    For instance, here in Colorado, the three biggest special education centers in Denver are closing their doors. The children they were treating now have to go to public schools, which do not have enough regular teachers right now, let alone special ed teachers. This is going to disrupt the education process of even more kids...the public schools are not prepared to handle this. The result? Even more frustrated teachers leaving to get different, better paying jobs, and kids that will care even less about actually learning anything.

    A significant number of homeless shelters here also had to close. I'm not talking about crazy-talking-to-himself-bum homeless shelters, I'm talking about the place where families and single moms can go for a few months if they lose their house or job, somewhere they can get back on their feet. Now these people are going to literally be on the street, doing god-knows-what to get by. Wonder why crime rates are up?

    Note to Republicans: Trickle-down economics does NOT work! You got your fucking tax cuts, so where's the money now? In a nice safe stock portfolio, because you're too fucking scared to give any to non-profits or invest in a new business.

    --
    This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
  285. Its not about the OS/Apps, its about SOP's by timmfisk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its true that the average GI can get things done quicker with an M$ OS, but that is on his home PC. While at work though, its about following a SOP (Standard Operating Proceedure) which renders this whole issue MUTE. All you military folk out there should speak up on this. I see so much crap about the fears of having a GI running a computer through a bash prompt... DUH, wake up, do you actually think that Uncle Sam would train everyone on the finer details of *nix? DUH!!! Its about a front-end app that the GI will be working with which means moving a mouse around, plugging in data, just like you would with an app like Excel, or even a Web browser. ITS NOT ABOUT THE OS, its about training.

    1. Re:Its not about the OS/Apps, its about SOP's by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      I totally agree. I don't see why people are brining up bash when it unlike the average soldier uses Windows command prompt. Besides, soldiers are expected to countinue to train, otherwise, U.S. Army would still be fighting with muskets.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    2. Re:Its not about the OS/Apps, its about SOP's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what does this have to do with the artice?

    3. Re:Its not about the OS/Apps, its about SOP's by timmfisk · · Score: 1

      What does this have to do with the artice?

      Once you understand that training is the GI's main concern (and hopefully your's), you will
      begin to see that the next issue is security and reliability. If you are an M$ user or admin
      you can think back to how many times you've had to reboot because of a virus or a stupid lock-up.
      Its a scarey thought to think that our national security on all military platforms (ie: ships,
      tanks, MISSLES) cross paths with an M$ box. That not only worries me, be gets me very TICKED OFF
      because of the lack of reasoning with our military commanders. Its a bunch of crap that Mr. Gates
      and his propaganda machine can insinuate that using M$ will save money. HOW IN THE HECK IS THIS TRUE?
      Hmmm, lets create an industry that serves only one company because of the selfish rules they
      enforce. Heres the proposition... I will create incomplete and unreliable software and charge taxpayers license fees on a yearly basis to continue development on a product that will never be delivered as promised. Once I have the government contract I now sell my source code to China and Russia... who knows where it goes from there (kinda like the nukes lost during the Soviet break-up). You people need to wake up and realize that having M$ on every computer in the world makes M$ the world leader, not fiscally, but rather like a school yard geek-turned-bully. How many times have you heard the saying "Knowledge is POWER." Well, theres your answer, thats what the real issue is here. You are an ignorant ass to think that some idiot in Redmond wont want to add a 'little something' to a program which allows leaks national security. Maybe you should spend a few years in combat to get a better perspective on combat readiness and national security while your butt is on the line, FOOL.

  286. Screwy by pkunzipper · · Score: 1

    Cut 80% of exitsting AmeriCorps after having promised a 50% increase, then spend as much as possible on computers for the army.

    "Make sure they all get 17 inch flat screens too!"

    -George W. Bush

    Budget my ass...

  287. Time to move to New Zealand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I won't have to pay M$ or Bu$h.

  288. redirecting articles by Joe+Enduser · · Score: 1
    Is this about that new shell Bashdot that I've heard so much about, which reposts articles that are piped through the current directory?

    Joe

  289. Fantasy Check by mobileskimo · · Score: 1

    I mean really guys, come on, don't let your reality check blind you to opinions. MS was the better choice, I would have to concur here, but that doesn't mean you will persuade any linux blood to feel any different about this deal. They've the right to strive for spreading the linux gospel as much as anybody has the right to preach about practicality. If we always choose to side with practicality, we'll never get any diversity.

    Otherwise, you have given up hope on anything non-MS. How will proponents of an alternate, opposing viewpoint ever be heard?

    As for your experience with windows, I'd have to say that you haven't had enough experience. Not to mention no understanding about the underlying principles that are relevant here. Regardless of the applied use of these desktops, call me an alarmist, but I would want it far more secure than anything I've seen on windows. Want to talk about history and track record? Stop being selective about it. Let's look at the history and track record of ALL the attributes of windows, not just customer handling.

    --
    "Last one in is a rotten goblin!" - Kepp
    1. Re:Fantasy Check by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

      Otherwise, you have given up hope on anything non-MS. How will proponents of an alternate, opposing viewpoint ever be heard?

      If practicality is the bottom line and the "opposing viewpoint" does not offer the needed practicality, does it really matter if they're heard or not? If they can't meet the needs of the guy writing the check they're not going to get the contract, no matter how many times they yell "but Linux is superior!"

      As for your experience with windows, I'd have to say that you haven't had enough experience.

      I beg to differ. As someone who's been using Windows since the 3.1 days, I'd say I'm a pretty reasonable judge of how stable or secure Windows is since I've seen it through many iterations.

      Regardless of the applied use of these desktops, call me an alarmist, but I would want it far more secure than anything I've seen on windows.

      Windows can be just as secure as Linux, you just have to be selective about the software you're running and what you do with the machine. The same is true of Linux. What, you thought you could just take an out-of-the-box Linux install and be good to go? Come on.

    2. Re:Fantasy Check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, what exactly does Windows enable the Army to do that Linux cannot that justifies them spending a king's ransom on it?

    3. Re:Fantasy Check by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

      So, what exactly does Windows enable the Army to do that Linux cannot that justifies them spending a king's ransom on it?

      New Windows machines running the same basic software that existing machines use can be effortlessly integrated into the existing set of Windows computers because all that Microsoft software, proprietary though it may be, can talk to each other. Also, there's no need to retrain anyone, hire new Linux admins, or worry about unexpected SNAFUs that may occur because the Linux equivalents of Microsoft software can't do everything the MS software can.

      Also, there's the satisfaction of knowing that MS at the very least has experience handling big customers. Do you really think Redhat has the experience necessary to provide support for the US Army? Have they ever had a customer anywhere near that big?

  290. It's not all or nothing by iamacat · · Score: 1

    They can continue running Windows on the NN% of machines running custom windows applications that are not handled by Wine. Doesn't mean they have to pay $950 for PCs that only need a web browser, e-mail, and a basic word processor.

    Why not just give the money to soldiers (or whatever endusers) who can figure out how to use Linux? From what I understand, military pay sucks big time compared to our risk-free desk jobs. I am sure they'll buy a book and spend a couple of weekends learning for ~1K bonus.

  291. Nothing new by Snowdog668 · · Score: 1

    When I was doing IT in the Army Reserve all the computers in the division were Dell desktops/laptops running Win98/2K and Office 97/2K.

    God help me, I even had to teach classes in MS Office. I feel so dirty...

    --
    I wouldn't say I'm a bad gambler but the last time I went to Vegas I even lost a buck on the soda machine.
  292. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Krojack · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you had to pay to speak in english would you continue speaking in it or would you change to another language like spanish, russian or chinese which would be 100% to speak in?

    I don't know a single word in those lanugages but I would be willing to learn if it was free.

  293. But Microsoft is throwing in a free toilet seat... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 1

    But Microsoft is throwing in a free toliet seat with each computer, which will save the Army about $600.00 per computer and toilet.

  294. Liar by codepunk · · Score: 1

    I have a xp machine beside me right now that crashes just sitting there. Don't even give me any crap about incompatible software or drivers it is bone stock and just crashes once a week.

    Now let me really hit you with a clue stick, when was the last time you read a MS EULA. Microsoft is not responsible for anything that happens with your system and or software, READ IT!

    --


    Got Code?
  295. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
    "A better question is why do people on Slashdot still hang onto IE? Windows I can understand, because many of us are at work when we are posting, but why IE?"

    Because at many companies, installing software not approved by company policy is an offence over which that you can get terminated. Even if you are a guru at fixing computers, big companies often outsource their IT so even if you crack the case that's a breach of contract. If the IT people are called to fix a misbehaving machnie and they find other software on it, you will get in big trouble from your manager.

    Furthermore, unless you work in IT, your account probably does not have permission to install new software. You've gotta cater to the lowest common denominator - many well meaning users will wreck their machines and get it infested with bonzi buddy if you give them half a chance.

  296. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find rdesktop better then vnc..

    Theres also grdesktop http://freshmeat.net/projects/grdesktop/?topic_id= 150
    Its a nice GTK 2 frontend for rdesktop.

  297. Morons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When's the last time a customer paying half-a-trillion dollars was contracted with a consumer-level EULA?

  298. First rule of goverment spending: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First rule of goverment spending:

    Why buy one if you can have two for twice the price?

    Creepy, rich and bald guy in Contact

  299. expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So the corporate whores are in bed with the federal government. What else is new? I bet the most republicrats would give tax dollars to the fortune 50 if they could get away with it. The US military's primary purpose (other than terrorizing the world) is to get cash and technology to Big business.

  300. yeah, that would result in.. by tka · · Score: 1

    ..blue screen death. :|

  301. Paid How Much? by serutan · · Score: 2, Funny

    Side comment: the poster writes, "At roughly $950 per computer this clearly involves more than just the OS."

    Not necessarily. These are the same people who in the past have paid thousands of dollars for hand tools and coffee makers.

  302. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Krojack · · Score: 1

    I use WineX for my windows games.

  303. Re:You're saying they should have nationalized Cor by legojenn · · Score: 1
    Not anymore. They were bought out by some Californian company.

    Look at the story

    --
    I make a reasonable middle-class wage by going to work and not spamming blogs with scams.
  304. Great deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The great things about this deal: the Army is going through a reseller, when clearly they have the purchasing power to buy direct; and most of the computers they purchase are normal consumer machines which will be purchased with Windows and Office already installed, so the Army will be paying twice for each machine


    If my government were spending double the amount of money it needed on defense, I wouldn't be calling it "Great", Id be pissed off.

  305. Or maybe... by anonymous+loser · · Score: 2, Insightful

    they just need the software, did an evaluation, and concluded that to switch over to OSS at this juncture would cost them way more than $471 million thanks to all of the training necessary combined with the very high cost of trying to migrate hundreds of thousands of existing systems and data to a completely different standard.

    The DoD and other government entities learned many years ago that they were paying top dollar for hammers and IT work like suckers, and they instituted a lot of very stringent policies that directly address that problem. When they do any kind of major purchase like this you can be sure they have studied it extensively, and sent out RFPs (Request For Proposals) to several competing bidders, fairly evaluated all of the proposals, and selected the winner. $471 million contracts do not get handed out on a handshake anymore because too many people got their ass handed to them in the 80s, and the government took steps to rectify the situation.

    Nowadays when bidding on government proposals, you typically have to bid at much lower service rates than you would to a private company, because the proposals are very competitive, and the goverment doesn't want to look like suckers.

    1. Re:Or maybe... by ablair · · Score: 1


      "Nowadays when bidding on government proposals, you typically have to bid at much lower service rates than you would to a private company, because the proposals are very competitive [...]"

      Almost US$1,000 per machine for 494,000 PCs is not at all competitive.

      "When they do any kind of major purchase like this you can be sure they have studied it extensively, and sent out RFPs (Request For Proposals) to several competing bidders, fairly evaluated all of the proposals [...]"

      OK, so who were the other competing bidders and for how much? How did they fairly evaluate the proposals and why did they decide on this solution? What's that, we don't know because it's all hush-hush? Oh, we're just supposed to trust them on this $.5B deal. Openness in government, and checks & balances, used to be held in high regard in America for a reason.

  306. Software... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the new way for the government to divert/filter money to the super secret organizations and black governments.

    Seriously though, before it was hammers and toitlet seats.

  307. Re:Why is this bad? by John+Hurliman · · Score: 1

    Accounting

  308. Aegis boat rendered helpless by BSOD by JimmytheGeek · · Score: 1

    The navy has an "all MS policy" with exceptions for "legacy" systems. Doubtless the knowledgible folks are #defining world+dog as "legacy"

  309. Not true by RdsArts · · Score: 1

    Everytime there's a backdoor or exploit, people always use it to kill my team.

    And if there's lag, OH boy.

  310. Terrorists will love getting into the Army boxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it is obvious MS still can't protect its software.

  311. Neiter does my mom... by binary+paladin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Linux can be tedious to set up but I'm so sick and tired of hearing, "But Windows is so much easier. Bash is too hard. Config files are too hard." My mom uses Linux, you know why? Because I set her computer up. It boots into a GUI and a nice clean windowed environment with graphical icons to let her get into all the programs she needs. Is Mozilla Firebird more complex in Linux than in Windows? Is it more complex than IE? My dad still uses Windows because unlike my mom who finally decided to stop being a luddite my dad's been using one for years and has apps he's used to. Still, that's all he knows. When he needs a new email account set up, the background changed or whatever, who does he call? Me. Whether it's a check box or a config file he's gonna call me. My point? Either you're the type that can tweak a computer in which case it doesn't matter if it's a config file or something in a preferences menu because you're trained enough to figure it out or you're the type that's gonna call a tech. I'm sitting here using Xfce4 right now and I almost never touch the shell for standard, day to day operations. I do for certain file management tasks, network troubleshooting and compiling but is the average yutz gonna do that? No. Ultimately we're talking about an organization who has no problem spending MY money on a $400 toilet seat, so why should they even worry about evaluating an alternative? I can see using Windows because they're used to it. That makes sense. But I'm so sick and tired of hearing crap like, "These guys don't give a shit about learning the wonders of the bash shell." There is NO NEED TO EVER SEE A CLI IN LINUX! The Windows GUI isn't any "easier." Clicking an icon and running a program is pretty much the same in both arenas.

  312. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by DigitalJEM · · Score: 1

    What a way to apply the world of the *nix to the real world :-) good job there. Depends how much they charged for it. If it was reasonable, I would continue with English, only because everyone knows it and uses it and I wouldn't have to put out the extra time to learn the new language. If there were classes to learn those other languages, and those classes were completely free, then sure, i'd learn them and probably convert sooner or later. But because there are going to be those who continue to use the "pay as you go" language, you're still going to have use it (and pay for it) just cause those few are stubborn and don't want to switch.

    --
    -Joshua
  313. I guess... by incom · · Score: 1

    "I hacked the pentagon" won't be such a big thing to brag about anymore.

    --
    True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
  314. 2 bad they couldn't support Linux / OpenOffice dev by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    It's a real pity they couldn't donate a million to open office, and a million to the core linux team, and they could pocketed the rest.

  315. Re:why don't use aluminium or wood for ash tray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why don't use aluminium or wood for ash tray in submarine? instead of spending on research on making less breakable glass.
    It remind me of story how the researcher try to make pen that can be used underwater and also at out of space without grafiti, just use pencil instead..

  316. OMG by baloogan · · Score: 0

    What will happen when the computers blue screen????? END OF THE WORLD!!

  317. Army Intelligence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see your point here. By the time you've educated a grunt enough to be really proficient at using *nix, then he probably also has become intelligent enough to not want to just instinctively kill people anymore either. This would be a huge problem for the Army.

    Come to think of it, after fighting Windows all day long, I sometimes feel the urge to become violent too.... So by making our soldiers use Windows, will actually be a good, motivational thing for them :-)

  318. certification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't OSs used by the Army required to be certified for security, and WinXP and 2000 are not certified for the governmental use? So they install Win98 or '95? With Win98 having 65536+ bugs?

    peace

    1. Re:certification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NT, 2000, and recently XP Pro have been accredited for DoD classified networks.

  319. Software merit? by zanderredux · · Score: 1
    When was the last time you saw such a big contract being negotiated only on technical merits?

    There's a huge, complex and invisible layer of personal connections and influence for this kind of contracts.

  320. NSA *REALLY* likes XP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially if everyone else on the planet would use it. :-)

    Need I tell you why? Surely can't be *that* naiive.

  321. CAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Client Access License

  322. FF = ON by PARENA · · Score: 1

    So does this mean even more US soldiers will die 'coz of friendly fire?

    --
    Here's the secret to immortality: ...oh dang, I forgot.
    1. Re:FF = ON by Retarded_Ninja · · Score: 1

      LOL...Thats exactly what that means...... I wouldn't bet my life on microshit products....

  323. not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm certain this order spreads payments over the life of the contract and allows the buyer to bail if certain performance requirements aren't met. The buyer has a huge incentive to keep this customer happy, no matter what the EULA says. For software deals that I've seen crossing the 10M mark, the contract is important, but the vendor will do nearly anything to keep the client, no matter what the contract says.

  324. Re:Yeah Buddy!- former grunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a former GRUNT (infantry soldier for those with the higher education), I understand the requirement for a graphic interface. After all, to the infantry, Caveman UGG is the perfect rolemodel. I have been from the warehouseing supply, to the trenches, and if I didn't understand it- it got "dropped" (read I drove a truck over it or landed a chopper on it) until I got something I understood and liked! For a final thought in the cold dark confines of a fighting position it's hard to type on frozen fingers let alone remember commands with bullets fling at you. (think I'm wrong and you can volenter to be down range in the hole I'm shooting at to see if you can hack the lights off to save yourself - bet I run out of ammo before you get the lights off.

  325. Better way of spending 471M by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems to me the Army, or perhaps the Defense Department for all armed services, should consider getting the business of having a department for computer systems development. Given an avg annual salary of 75k/yr, 471M is 6,280 man years of engineering development paid for. Given that this 471M is for 6 years, that's still more than 1,000 man years of work per year for the same price. With that much divided to developers, qa, and project mgt, the army could use OSS as the base for customized applications that would truely do exactly what they want, and do it well. Perhaps they could even use the NSA BSD/Linux that is security enhanced for this kind of thing. Not only that, after 6 years they'd own the whole thing and not have to renew any licenses and do this whole thing again. I'm sure with that kind of resource, they could come up with a very easy to use system, and not have to stress about which exact computers are licensed or not, since they would own the entire system and could write their own version/update/access control into it.

    If this was performed/controlled by a shared Defense Dept group, the amount of common codebase and reuse would quickly make further developments even easier to integrate with the others. Since all the armed forces would be using a similar codebase and general systems, it might even make it way easier for each of the distinct divisions of the armed forces to synchronize systems with each other as well. Field techs could be trained on the system, providing most of their own field support.

  326. Gubmint RS6000/p660 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My friend did some contract work for the Army a few months back. They needed a pair of IBM RS/6000 P-series 660s, fully loaded, attached to a pair of FastT700 fibrechannel arrays. Close to $1M worth of hardware, by my rough estimates, having purchased similar hardware in the past.

    A friend, eh?

    Well I *am* a government network manager who recently acquired a fully-loaded RS6000/p660 with only a single large fiberchannel storage array, and run 350 users on it, including Lotus Domino and several large Oracle databases and apps. This machine only cost my organization $165K. Methinks your cost estimates are waaaaay off base, about as trustworthy as your purported information source. Govt IT folks aren't as stupid as you might think. We're generally quite shrewd about our purchasing habits, and buy the right sized equipment to do the job for more years of useful service life out of it than your typical private enterprise does.

    Posting to Slashdot as A/C, natch... yer tax dollars at work, hah! I figure that since according to your cost figures, I must have saved the taxpayers over 300K, so a few minutes surfing at work is justified, eh?

    1. Re:Gubmint RS6000/p660 by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 1

      Govt IT folks aren't as stupid as you might think. We're generally quite shrewd about our purchasing habits, and buy the right sized equipment to do the job for more years of useful service life out of it than your typical private enterprise does.

      Unfortunately, I generally trust what my friends say more than I trust what folks who post anonymously on weblogs do. As I listened to him regale me with tales of setting up and configuring these machines, I did the math in my head. Perhaps my estimate was off by $100k or so in either direction, but a pair of loaded 700s and a pair of loaded 660s comes awfully close to $1M before any IBM discounts.

      This was, by the way, a departmental web server.

      - A.P.

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  327. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

    Oh so I'm not the only that has the wheel just stop working for no aparent reason..

    Jaysyn

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  328. Softmart Convicted of Fraud, Worked with Microsoft by waldoj · · Score: 1
    I thought that the name "Softmart" was familiar, so I did some poking around. Seems that was a good instinct.
    Software provider Softmart will face up to $1 million in fines after pleading guilty to bilking Microsoft in a phony rebate scheme in 1995. [...] According to court documents, Sloane ordered reluctant employees to submit phony sales reports to Microsoft and Symantec in late June and early July of 1995 that amounted to close to $1.2 million.
    It seems that the whole deal was set up by then-CEO of Softmart Richard Sloane, who was never charged. He resigned his position but, as of 2000, still owned 100% of the privately-held business. See the CMP Techweb story for details.

    What's amazing is that not only does Microsoft continue to do business with Softmart, but the federal government is willing to reward this behavior. Weirder still, Softmart was actually tied to Microsoft further: they were one of the half-dozen companies to which Microsoft farmed out the telephone support for Windows 95 upon its release, according to this guy's homepage and this other guy's resume.

    2 points to the first person that can tie Softmart to the Bush administration!

    -Waldo Jaquith
  329. Disgusting by Ogerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One-tenth of that $471,000,000 would be easily enough to pay people to bring OpenOffice or KOffice well past the quality level of MS Office in a short amount of time.

    Think about it! One-tenth of that amount would mean 471 Open Source programmers paid $100,000 for a year.

    And yet all those tax dollars are instead being funneled into the Microsoft "Black Hole of Software License Fees" where they will never be seen again and where they will certainly not benefit the public interest. And that's just one-tenth of the contract! What about all that other money?! They could spend another four-tenths on XFree86, KDE, various security-related projects, etc. and STILL have half the contract amount left over to migrate existing army-specific software to Qt or other superior cross-platform toolkit able run native on both the new platform and any old Windoze machines that haven't been converted yet.

    I propose that we need a large non-profit Open Source consulting firm that specializes in large corporate and government contracts such as these. (Non-profit in the sense of the programmers are the only ones being paid.)

    1. Re:Disgusting by civilengineer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Correct me if I am wrong, but 471 programmers at 100,000 per year is only 47,100,000 isn't it?
      The total MS is getting is 471,000,000. They can hire 4710 OSS programmers for the same rate not 471

      --

      New year Resolution: Don't change sig this year
    2. Re:Disgusting by Ogerman · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I am wrong, but 471 programmers at 100,000 per year is only 47,100,000 isn't it?
      Yeah, that was the point.. that they'd have tons of money left over for other projects. I was proposing that those 471 programmers could, in one year, transform KOffice or OpenOffice into an office suite far superior to MS's.

    3. Re:Disgusting by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Think about it! One-tenth of that amount would mean 471 Open Source programmers paid $100,000 for a year."

      A year? And what happens if/when a new front in the "War on Terror" opens up in three months? Sure, this software won't be used on the front, but even REMFs get busier when Things Happen. The Army needs a solution that is either isntantaneous (not going to happen) or 100% backwards-compatible with their existing solution (what's WINE been up to?).

  330. Sorry, Wrong. by 2short · · Score: 1, Interesting


    This might be true in other government departments, but year after year Congress gives the Pentagon more money than they ask for.

    1. Re:Sorry, Wrong. by GlassHeart · · Score: 1
      year after year Congress gives the Pentagon more money than they ask for.

      The money is intended for the Pentagon to buy weapons and other products from manufacturers from their home states. I don't see how saving taxpayer money by switching to Linux benefits anybody in Congress.

  331. Well this is not good!! by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 1

    If the Army is to depend on Windows then we are screwed.
    The enemy will virus and hack the Army like there is no tomorrow. Not to mention BSODs from hell.

    They'll spend more time rebooting than working.
    Who's the real enemy?

  332. This is funny... by Retarded_Ninja · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    On one end you have the gov't trying to go after Microsoft for anti-trust and other shit and on the other end you have them paying $960 per machine for shit you could by in the store for about $400..... Who hear really believes that the gov't reallywanted to do anything to microsoft. I believe it was all bullshit propaganda brought on by a ruthless monopolistic corporation that we know as the Government. Fuck the government...when have they done anything for us besides bleed us dry. We work and they get to spend our money on crap like microsoft instead of thins we need. FUCK THE GOVERNMENT..FUCKING COCKSUCKING SCANDELOUS FAGGOTS. it should be the Boston Tea Party all over again.

  333. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by mah! · · Score: 1
    >Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    Work.

    Nope.
    If at work they told me I must use MS-Windows, I'd quit. Done it before. The good news of being an IT professional is that you still can avoid MS products completely.

  334. Re:Yeah Buddy!- former grunt by 2short · · Score: 1


    So you've found yourself trying to hack into a computer (controlling the power grid presumably?) while under fire in order to turn the lights off so you won't be seen by someone who is already shooting at you? I find this unlikely. If true, I'm wondering why a grenade thrown at a transformer (or even the guy shooting at you), or a bullet at the light bulb (or even the guy shooting at you), would not have been more expeditious?

  335. oh, that makes me feel so much better. by twitter · · Score: 1
    $953/computer / 6 years = $158 per year.

    Six years locked into M$ nonsense, that purchase price is the least of the worries. Patches, daily reboots, systems that don't know the difference between root and private Gomer, Gator, Gomer's privatly installed games, spyware, scumware and outright banditware known as Microsoft. Microsoft shills themselves estimates keeping one of their, "older" computers costs 10,000/year in support. Yet here it is, the biggest single source I've ever heard of. Even Lockheed Martin has to bid for it's work. Shesh, did the RFQ state, "M$ only"?

    I really feel for everyone who has to use and maintain this crap. Good luck.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  336. Don't most of the organisations already do that? by subzero_ice · · Score: 1

    Most of the organisations pay twice for Windows. I know most corporations, schools and colleges buy new machines from dell that already have Windows on them and Dell already charged them for Windows. They then go onto install their customized version of Windows for which they paid the bulk user license fee and if you use one serial for all those machines u get sued even though you've paid your dues to M$.

  337. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by drunk_as_in_beer · · Score: 1

    True enough, and I can't argue that. My 95% guess was probably wrong. But even then, for those given a choice, why IE? Where I work we have a choice, yet I still see IE heavilly used. I think some of the people have given the alternatives a try, and like them. Yet a lot stick with IE. One guy who is a developer, I walk by his office occasionally and I always see him in IE with popups all over the screen. If you're going to use IE, at least get a popup blocker and save yourself some effort.

    --
    --Drunk as in Beer
  338. Goverment buying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are certain rules some government agencies must follow, they cannot always grab the best deal. Schools for one must have a contract bid list. They will give discounts on some software and jack the price up for others.

  339. Drop in the Bucket by av8tors32 · · Score: 1

    $490 Million may seem like a lot of money but to DoD its not that much....

    $490 Million, gets maybe 2-3 Stealth Bombers or 15-20 Apache Helos... and of course this contract is stretched over a long time period, so do the math....

    One Tomahawk missile costs 1 Million dollars. How many of them have we shot at worthless targets over the past year???

  340. Oh well, you are the man. by twitter · · Score: 1

    Good luck keeping all that crap running. If you are using as much free software as you say you are, you know how much easier it is to maintain. Patches, rebuilds, stuff that just never works, ugh, what a pain. Someone needs to write a millspec for software, so you will be forced to buy better quality. This single source contract handed down by the big dogs as a one size fits all "solution" is a really bad sign of things to come. It reeks of disrespect and micromanagement. You have been handed your tools for the next six years, best for the job or not. Good luck. I get ill just thinking what you are going to get to deal with.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  341. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by sinserve · · Score: 1

    Not so. I was surprised when I mirrored an slashdotted site. I set my
    apache to full logging and waited. After 1500 hits, I found that 68%
    where on Linux alone (Phoenix, Konqueror, Galeon, and standard moz.)

    FWIW, it was sunday and the story was on the "developers" section, so:
    1) This "work" excuse might actually have a merrit. 2) A developer's
    story might attract an slightly more sophisticated slashdoter than one
    who reads (say) games section or your usual YRO arm-chair activists.

    P.S. There were no other Unices, just Linux, and if you count OS X
    about 20 or so hits.

  342. Initial OS Version by phorm · · Score: 1

    Did the computers initally come with Windows XP Home (which is usually what consumer machines come with) or XP Pro? How about office?

    Not to gainsay the fact that this expenditure is grossly high, I could see the army having to buy Pro after the initial machine+OS, and possible a better office.

  343. Not quite by mac123 · · Score: 1

    Defense if Federal budget $
    Education is primarily State budget $ (we don't have federalized education).
    I know in my town, we spend approx. $10k/student.

    Lets go with a smaller figure...$5k per student.
    Lets underestimate and go with 20,000,000 school age students.

    Do the math and show me how we spend less.

  344. Do the math here... by dacarr · · Score: 1
    At roughly $950 per computer this clearly involves more than just the OS....

    C'mon, this is governed by a body who is known for having spent $50k for toilet seats. You figure it out.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  345. Two oxy morons... by malignatus · · Score: 1

    Microsoft Works

    Military Intelligence

  346. So give them something that will kill them? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You guys have to remember that there is a HUGE digital divide out there and getting soldiers with out much education comfortable with computers tends to be quicker and easier with Windows.

    Therefore you want to simplify the training by standardizing on a system which not only holds the record for security vulnerabilities, but whose source has been delivered to the electronic warfare departments of most of our potential enemies but NOT to our own academic-community security specialists?

    What do you do the next time there's a conflict and some new crop of blended-threat self-propagating worms (locusts?) suddenly takes out the US Army's entire office infrastructure?

    ==============

    While you're at it, why are you advocating depending on the NON-standardized training the recruits got as civilians rather than teaching them "The Army Way"? (But if you MUST, why not use a Windows-like interface and workalike basic apps, ala Lindows or KDE + OpenOffice, for the basic stuff? They have to learn the army-specific apps anyhow. Meanwhile there's a good chance the next crop of high-school students will be learning on open source platforms rather than Windows, due to developments already discussed on Slashdot.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:So give them something that will kill them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen twice as many software related redhat vulnerabilities in the last 2 months than for windows.

      Your logic is flawed.

    2. Re:So give them something that will kill them? by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1

      XP has a really pathetic amount of software included. If you want anything else (IRC client? ftp server? SSH client/server?) that's a download and not counted as a 'windows vulnerability' .. never mind the number of idiots that get infected via mIRC or Kazaa, that doesn't get counted as a 'windows' vulnerability.

      So to be fair you can include vulnerabilities in common windows software as part of the 'windows' count, or don't count vulnerabilities in things like SSH, Sendmail, ftpd, xchat, etc. where Windows doesn't have any 'bundled' equivalent..

      Or you could observe that a default 'desktop' redhat install is just a fraction of all the available packages (which still includes tons of apps WindowsXP doesn't give you), and count vulnerabilities for only those packages.

      Or you could just check your mailbox and count the number of 'Windows viruses' you've been sent this month versus the number of 'Linux viruses'..

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
  347. The next day... by Richy_T · · Score: 1
    "Oh, general, you meant spend half-a-billion dollars on a minesweeper? D'oh"

    Rich

  348. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by paganizer · · Score: 1

    The REAL reason I still use IE, for most browsing is because in Nutscrape or Mozilla, when you click on the URL in the address bar, you have to click twice; you have to click once to move the cursor there, then you have to click drag to hilite the portion you want to type over; while in IE, you just have to click-drag.
    Bugs the unholy shit out of me. I still use Mozilla for things like web mail, my "daily repeat surfing", but if I suspect I'm going to get off the beaten path, I feel compelled to use IE, even though I KNOW it's wide open to a gazillion exploits because I can't update past the Win2kSP2 level because of the totalitarian Licensing practices of Microsoft instituted at SP3.
    Phew.

    FREENET=FREESPEECH

    --
    Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
  349. This doesn't seem to be such a bad thing.. by xRelisH · · Score: 1

    I know everyone hates MS, and I'm not too fond if the company either, but look at it this way. some of that $471M is going to make its way to MS employees. Those employees have more money, and they will spend more money, and the money gets spread around.
    However, one could have a long and heated Economic debate about this, since throwing money at the problem doesn't always fix things.

  350. Open File Format by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did the government bother to dictate that Microsoft use open file formats before dumping so much money on them?

  351. Common misconception by kupci · · Score: 1
    I'll agree that it is important to have an easy to use system, and while a windows plus is that Microsoft puts great emphasis on ease of use as far as the apps go, that does not necessarily mean it is easier to *administer* than something like Linux.

    Windows boxes require constant care and feeding, fixpacks, IE patches and the like. This is due to the origins of DOS as a standalone system. This is why so many organizations have full time help desks that are simply swamped. Now compare that with running apps from the server. Certainly you have this capability with Windows, i.e. using Citrix, however with Unix/Linux, this is how it was designed to work from the ground up (for example, X-windows was specifically designed to run over a network connection, this is why you can actually have decent performance over a modem).

    For very specific systems such as point-of-sales (think HomeDepot, or your basic chain department store, etc), etc, you will definitely find they run Unix or even on a mainframe, as it's vastly easier to administer.

    Therefore, if it were my money (and in a way it is), and I had very specific applications that are required, I would go with Linux. But usually in huge deals like this, there is much unseen bargaining going on that we are not privy to.

    1. Re:Common misconception by mpe · · Score: 1

      Windows boxes require constant care and feeding, fixpacks, IE patches and the like. This is due to the origins of DOS as a standalone system.

      It also dosn't help when Microsoft deliberatly sets out to write spahgetti code and calls the result "integration".

      For very specific systems such as point-of-sales (think HomeDepot, or your basic chain department store, etc), etc, you will definitely find they run Unix or even on a mainframe, as it's vastly easier to administer.

      Though you do see Windows machines being used to emulate ANSI terminals.

  352. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
    "But even then, for those given a choice, why IE?"

    Because until you use the alternatives, you don't realise how bad IE truly is. Of course if you don't know how much better the alternatives are, it's too much effort to go download and install another program.

    I usually hook people by demonstrating it as a 'by-the-way' sort of item when I have to show something that requires a web browser anyway. I open a link in another tab with a mouse gesture or something like that and they're enthralled. Once I have their attention, THEN I mention popup blocking and all that goodness. Once they're into it, they're raving about the browser's speed and the ability to block images from certain sites.

    The key is to not make the purpose of their watching your computer to see Mozilla - their eyes will glaze over if you tell them that you're showing them an amazing new prgoram. Let them realise for themselves the benefits and they'll be jumping up and down wanting to get it!

  353. guess they feel they have more than enough money.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With recent increases in military spending, I'm not surprised they are feeling so cocky as to worry about going through a reseller to get Microsoft products.

    I guess they feel they have all the money in the world (and probably do).

  354. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by macshune · · Score: 1
    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    Work.
    Wife.
    Pr0n.

    Cygwin
  355. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  356. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    AFAIR, the FBI actually issued security warnings against XP.

    Yes, and AFAIR, the FBI issued security warnings against Linux and FreeBSD. Do you have anything to back up that rather litigious statement?

  357. When Men Were Men... by istartedi · · Score: 1

    what are they doing smoking in a sub

    This bit was related to me through a friend who had a relative who was in a sub during WWII.

    "When they were submerged he used to keep two cigarettes lit at two different locations, and he liked it because they wouldn't burn very fast and he could just keep them lit by taking a drag at one location or the other. If they went totally out, then there was trouble."

    Either this guy was the captain or a high ranking officer, because I don't imagine that they allowed everybody to do that.

    The point being, is that the guy enjoyed smoking in a low-oxygen environment because he didn't have to smoke the whole thing within a given time frame like you usually do.

    I don't know if this story is true or not. Part of me doesn't want to know. Not to knock the guys in subs now; but men were men back then. There was no A/C on those boats. Real men don't need A/C. Real men don't need oxygen. I mean... the myth of Jebediah Springfield has value too.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  358. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (troll)
    Then again, the FBI is issuing warnings about approaching guys having sex with goats.
    (/troll)

  359. Does Michael just make stuff up? by Fizzlewhiff · · Score: 1

    The great things about this deal: the Army is going through a reseller, when clearly they have the purchasing power to buy direct; and most of the computers they purchase are normal consumer machines which will be purchased with Windows and Office already installed, so the Army will be paying twice for each machine.

    You assume that the PC's purchased will come with Windows and Office already installed. This isn't always the case. The company I work for has a huge deal with Microsoft. We buy large quantities of PC's from Dell. We take our software and configure one box and then we use that box to make an image and image the rest of them. I know of many companies that do this with large installations. It doesn't mean we're buying the software twice (once with the PC and once in our volume license).

    --

    'Same speed C but faster'
  360. Come on Kif by setien · · Score: 1

    Come on Kif! Let's show these freaks what a bloated, runaway military budget can really do!

    --
    Give me liberty or give me kill -s 9
  361. Smoke em if you got em by tjstork · · Score: 1


    If you are 2000 feet under water, you hear the sounds of torpedos coming at you and you can count off the seconds until you get killed because the torpedo is faster than you are, smoking seems entirely reasonable.

    --
    This is my sig.
  362. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    You've got to be kidding me! Using IE for pr0n is shooting yourself in the foot!

    Mozilla has popup blocking, tabbed browsing, and most important of all: mouse gesture controls. That's right, you can do everything one-handed

  363. Thanks for the heads-up by flacco · · Score: 1

    I guess I'll start learning Arabic now.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  364. zerg by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

    *pshaw*

    The Pentagon has misplaced a trillion dollars before, so if you feel that they're mistakenly spending half a billion dollars on something worthless, don't worry about it.

    --
    [o]_O
  365. Re:Is there a different EULA compared to volume li by reverendslappy · · Score: 1

    Is it still a req for C2-compliance that the system in question can't be attached to a network? ;-)

  366. Yeah, go, go go! Go right ahead. by Qbertino · · Score: 2, Informative

    Meanwhile I'll watch the day draw nearer where the german military finally switches to SuSE/United Linux or BSD due to unanswered questions wether M$ OSes have secret US-"No such Agency" backdoors built in or not.

    Allthough keeping in mind that germany has been blowing 500 Million Euro since the eighties on building a new military IT strukture that still may take a while....

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  367. Re:uh oh = big ass faggot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Hackerdom easily tolerates a much wider range of sexual and lifestyle variation than the mainstream culture. It includes a relatively large gay and bisexual contingent. "

    -- The Jargon File

    Please, guys, think before you type. I don't care what you're trying to say, but using the words "big ass faggot" in a /. post is just about equivalent to using "big ass nigga", alright, it's going to not only offend people, it's also going to make people feel uncomfortable and unwelcome.

  368. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    FateCreatr: "blah blah blah blah blaha blahablahablahablah"

    Translation: Yes, Microsoft is raking in a ton of money again.

    We have the total amount, we have the number of computers, we can compute the cost per machine. All the licensing shit does is spin it.

  369. Keep in mind... by aksansai · · Score: 1

    From my experience in software purchases, when a government organization wishes to purchase licenses for software, they do so when the following criteria have been met:

    1) Do we get training (if necessary)?
    2) Do we get 24 hour support (if necessary)?
    3) Do we get notified of any security problems as soon as they happened (if necessary)?
    4) Will this integrate well into our current network and systems framework?
    5) Is it compatible with our existing data files that we've been using for years now?

    Although Red Hat and SuSE have been making headway into enterprise level products, they have been doing so targeting the server arena, not necessary the desktop arena. Both Red Hat and SuSE are adept at writing utilities to manage and configure their server products, but the end-user applications are not under the control of either of the companies. As such, it would be expensive for open source companies to take on the responsibility of training and integrating their own packages included with their own distributions as well as Microsoft integrates their own applications with their operating systems.

    I am not advocating Microsoft's business practices. However, they do have an extraordinary business model of "we have the best to support the software most widely used in the industry". It works and has made their products a lucrative business for both government and private industry. The government's expenditure on Microsoft's licenses is small considering the amount of businesses (in private industry) that have purchased licenses (OS, applications, utilities, support, etc.) for their employee base. The government made Slashdot news because it is the government.

    If, say, for instance the KDE folks would support their software by offering in-depth training, 100% compatibility with Microsoft products, and installation/troubleshooting support they would be a contender.

    Most things in the government: it's not necessarily the price because often then not you get what you pay for. Convenience and saving time is worth the extra money for the powers that be. A new company that is dedicated to such type of desktop support to spearhead Linux into the arena where people are used to clicking the little "E" logo is definitely needed.

    --
    Ayup
  370. ___ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And remember folks, that's our money.

  371. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Valiss · · Score: 1

    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    Work.


    Yep, it's called the "Real World." Don't get me wrong: I like open source, *nix and the rest as much as the next guy, but when you work for a company, odds are it'll be M$. At home I can be as l33t as I want, but at work, you get what you get.

    --

    -Valiss
  372. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    I use it so that I can utilize all the windows software that I 'borrowed' from my employer.

  373. G.E.D.... by macshune · · Score: 1

    the Good Enough Diploma!!!

  374. It strikes ME as NUTS. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Now hear this: the US military DOES NOT USE MS WINDOWS BOXEN TO CONTROL NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Or, any sort of weapon for that matter. The military, like most large institutions, has a need for office automation apps, e-mail, and the like. And for this, they use Windows and Office.

    So they use Windows to order, ship, track, inventory, order deployment of, etc. nuclear weapons. Also MREs, toilet paper, and all the other supplies necessary for a deployment - and whose quantities and destinations are secret, because, if you're sending X amount of toilet paper to Borneo, it means you're sending Y amount of troops to Borneo.

    So what happens when it's time to send troops against one of our likely future enemies, or one of their clients. And suddenly a wave of shiny new blended-threat self-propagating worms from their info-warefare department floods through the Army's half-million desktops, emailing/ftping/whateveing the info to the other side and then wiping essentially every office computer in the U.S. Army?

    Rember:
    - Microsoftware holds the record for security vulnerabilities.
    - Microsoft showed the source code to the info-warfare department of every major non-US power recently (to "satisfy them of its security").

    Meanwhile it does NOT show source to the U.S. academic-community software security specialists - who wouldn't look anyhow due to non-disclosure requirements. Requirements which, of course, are a total joke to a foreign infowar department.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:It strikes ME as NUTS. by FeloniousPunk · · Score: 1

      You know, after reading your comment, it occuries to me that you not only know very little about how US military networks are protected, let alone configured, nor how the US military does business at all. From your comments, you'd think that the entire US Army is on one network, completely unprotected and open to the outside world. I can assure you, the military's network security is very robust.
      But really, your comment is alien to reality I don't know where to begin to refuting it. I'll just leave at this - if some foe could pull off an attack like you described, they're so elite that they'd be able take down networks not running on Windows. But I don't see that happening, as your scenario is about as credible as this one: "Well, what would we do if Al-Qaida snuck ninjas into every US command post in the world and the White House, and at precisely the same moment, killed everyone from the President on down to all the generals. What would we do then, HUH?"

      --
      I know this because Tyler knows this.
  375. Think about complexity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I've been to Le Bourget last week-end (you know ? the only place in the world where american military planes don't fly).

    And I have seen what kind of job normal people in the army (not speaking about warriors) do. A friend of mine is working in the business.

    In the French army (which might not be the most advanced in the world...), they use integrated software that do real-time data-base mining and updating to adapt instantaneously, for instance on an airfield, the disponibility of a plane and the engines and the fioul and the crew and the date of last use and the date of next revision and the weapons and the disponibility of the airfield and ...
    The time scale has to range from 30 mn (for fighters missions) to 5 months (for humanitary missions).
    Every battlefield is different and every plane has a different engine that has to be checked at different intervals of time.

    At the same time you communicate by this software with other military bases and advanced alert systems and ministry of defense...

    This is a very complex task and every existing software (developped by high-tech companies like sagem or thales in France) has to be complex, safe, takes ages to develop and costs lots of money. This can't be a GNU project.

    So, like CatiaV5 or other sophisticated software, they run on windows ...simply because everyone is using it !!! .

    I think one reason is the almost monopolistic position of windows on desktops which has a very stront effect on every software company :-((

  376. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by flacco · · Score: 1
    A common problem is the use of NTLM authentication on work proxies, or the inability to install new software.

    I believe Mozilla now supports NTLM.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  377. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by timmyf2371 · · Score: 1
    Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?

    In a word, yes.

    Firstly, I don't use Windows for games - that's what my PS2 is for. I use Windows for:

    Accounting Software (Sage)
    Compatability Testing
    Shoutcast Server.

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  378. Re:$471,000,000?!? Drag-n-DropDead... Skynet T1.0 by neurocutie · · Score: 1
    Microsoft intruduces powerful-new military battle interface "GI Bob" software to unify army command and control systems REDMOND, Wash., May 23, 2003 -- American combat military personnel may get upgraded this year following Microsoft's release of a new battle user interface. The new product, Microsoft GI Bob for Windows, is based on the innovative user interface system initially released by Microsoft in 1993 to consumer sectors.

    You forgot the GIBob Drag-n-DropDead(TM) "technology". Open up specific mission folder and you get a bunch of target icons on the Battlefield Desktop(TM). Drag your weapon icons on top of the intended targets and Bloowie! Specially designed "Are you sure?" dialog "technology" to prevent friendly fire. Enhanced desktop shredder for those SpecialOps missions that no-one else should know about. PlausibleDeniability operating mode so you can disavow any knowledge of GIBob's actions. Comes with Version 1.0 of Skynet(TM) so multiple GIBob's can communicate with each other over the net to coordinate attacks with a click of a button.

  379. Way back in Gulf War I by jimcooncat · · Score: 1

    When we (a small Medical headquarters unit) deployed we left our Windows boxes home. Personnel and Supply used Burroughs machines (some type of UNIX) to manage our stuff. These 386's were pretty tough and stood a lot more abuse than the crappy clones we left behind, except for going through a lot of floppy drives 'cause people wouldn't put the report disks in baggies like we told them. And had to keep blowing the sand out of everything. Anyway, point is that we did just fine with these boxes -- managing people and supplies and mail, doing word processing and spreadsheets -- and when we got back to Texas I used it to get a Compuserve account. The Japanese "donated" a bunch of new Windows machines during Desert Shield in lieu "real" military support (I don't blame 'em). The Colonel allocated himself the one for our unit and spent every evening mastering Solitaire and Minesweeper. This was a valuable asset in that it kept his mind occupied with something other than conjuring up new busy-work for us.

  380. Doublethink by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, another fine example of doublethink.

    You say you don't love war, and decry the killing of innocents in the same sentance.

  381. Army Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline by pmsyyz · · Score: 2, Informative

    Department of the Army Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline:
    DSN 225-1578
    (in Virginia) 800-572-9000
    800-752-9747

    --
    Phillip
  382. Re:Yeah Buddy!- former grunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if you had bothered to read his post dumbass *he* was saying that if *someone else* thought that they could sit in a foxhole and hack into a system while *he* was shooting at them, *he* bets the *he* would run out of ammo before that *someone else* managed to turn off the lights via hacking.

    And *he* is right.

  383. Of course it's more than just Windows and Office. by qtp · · Score: 1

    but there's obviously something more there than an operating system.

    If you believe that, I've got a $600.00 toilet seat you might be interested in.

    (I hope I'm not showing my age.)

    --
    Read, L
  384. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by f0rt0r · · Score: 1

    Not me, I barely use Windows for that now that I have WineX working pretty darn good. Rebooting to play a game for 30 minutes was pretty irritating, and I don't miss it at all.

    --
    I can't afford a sig!
  385. The military doesn't care about a "digital divide" by qtp · · Score: 1

    they only want to use what they are comfortable with. And for 95% of the graduating class that's windows.

    I was enlisted in the Navy, and I can't ever remember anyone asking me what tools I would prefer. In fact, I remember quite distinctly being taught that i would use "whatever damn tools we tell you to use" or something similar, but with more swearing and less concern for any opinion that I may or may not have held (but obviously I did not hold any opinions, because if any one of my superiors got the notion that I did hold such an opinion there would have been hell to pay).

    This Army that you develop software for certainly sounds like a nice place, with all of this concern over what operating system might the enlisted folk prefer and such. It warms my heart to know how much things have changed, and instills in my mind great confidence in our leaders to know that they will not let silly notions about stability, efficiency, cost, and especially security get in the way of allowing our elisted men work in the computer operating environment of thier choice.

    --
    Read, L
  386. Re:To my american friends by forkboy · · Score: 1

    -If tax cuts are coming, the clinics and shelters should also stop whatever wasteage that they are plauged by. They too should not have copies of windows on their accounting machines, or be overstaffed.

    Most smaller clinics and shelters are already accustomed to running on a budget. When your existance is based on the generosity of others, you kinda have to. (Big guys like the Red Cross are another story) But when the money stops coming completely, it doesn't matter how efficient they are, there's nothing to work with.

    Why do retards need school anyway? Not that I don't care about their welfare, but what could school provide for them that home could not?

    Many of the kids in these programs could be fairly functional members of society if they are taught some behavioral skills and educated as much as they possibly can be. Do you want to pay this kid's rent the rest of your life because he's on permanent social security, or would you like to see him actually get a job washing dishes are picking up trash somewhere? Plus, many of the kids in these programs are borderline...they're not quite suited for regular school but witht he proper attention could do just fine. Our public schools aren't equipped to deal with them and they will just disrupt the learning process for these kids. They still deserve a chance, though.

    Oh, and most parents of these kids have neither the ability nor the desire to teach them what they need. They can't get this kind of education at home because their parents don't know what to do, or can't be bothered to do it.

    And the same common sense applies to schools as it does for the military and to social programs. If there's wasteage it needs to be fixed. (For example, why do the upper management of the school boards need to be paid so much?? Why are teachers who fail to perform allowed to remain just because their union is protecting them?)

    I couldn't agree more. Not all teachers should be in their positions. But why punish the good ones? However, it does take a certain caliber of person to lead. Upper management makes a lot of money there for the same reason they do in the private sector: there'd be no incentive to take on the responsibility if there wasn't reward for it. Of course, there should be more accountability to match that salary, both in the coporate and nonprofit sector.

    crazy-talking-to-himself-bums don't deserve shelter? I think they do!

    I could have worded that better...they most certainly do merit shelter. The main argument I get when I discuss the homeless topic is "Tell those fucking bums to get jobs!" Most people are under the delusion that the scary guys begging for money are the only homeless people in their city, when in fact they are less than 10%. I suppose I was anticipating that response from readers and jumped the gun there.

    I'm more afraid of the bums who decided booze is more fun than work and the government gives them a free ride so they take it. More wasteage that could have went to good social programs but instead put bread in the mouth of some drunk who deserves nothing.

    It doesn't really work that way. The money doesn't get handed to these guys. It goes to shelters that provide them meals and warmth. Sure, most of them aren't going to ever use these facilities to help themselves get anywhere better, but this type of shelter costs next to nothing to run. The more expensive shelters are the ones that carefully screen their residents and/or monitor them once they are admitted. If they're not actively working to better their position (find housing, find jobs, etc) then they're back in the street with a quickness. These are the ones that really make a difference, and these are the ones that are closing.

    --
    This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
  387. US Govt now Largest MS Customer? by ablair · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Neally half a billion to MS for licenses & equipment in this one agreement alone? I'm glad I don't live in the US, but if I did I'd seriously consider contacting my congressman or senator about this deal. From the few details made public so far, it looks like the DoD really didn't negotiate that hard for the best deal for taxpayer $$$. I'd be more than a little steamed, considering that with a purchase of this magnitude there is a great deal of negotiating power, now that there are secure alternatives; power that apparently wasn't used. It almost sounds like a subsidy. Would Americans let this issue fade away without investigation?

  388. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Phishpin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Then the only viable solution for a large portion of Slashdotters would be to...pirate the English language!

    Arrrgghh!!!

    --
    -phish
  389. Re:I'm an Army Sysadmin (doesn't mean jack) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry,

    I FULLY DISAGREE! Yes, I work in the industry too and all I can say is MOST of the problems are MICROSOFT (and poorly trained IT staff). Word crashes on a daily basis, DLL hell... Why are the servers on site rebooted once a week? I'll tell you... Reliability in MS sucks!!!

    We used to run Solaris. We had one reboot in 4 years!!!!! Now we've gone to Microsoft, we've lost the email server twice in 3 years (and that includes ALL of the emails for that timeframe) and we've had at least one server failure every 2 months. FYI, it took 5 days each time to get the emails coming back in again.... FIVE WORKING DAYS!!!!! EACH TIME!!!!

    I strongly disagree that Linux is inappropriate for the average user. 95% of the defence force use Word, Excel and Powerpoint - PERIOD! Now, Linux can hose that in easily with something like Open Office!!!

    As another example of crappy Microsoft is Outlook. Everyime Windows crashes, outlook.pst becomes corrupted. This is one of many examples of the sort of support calls you receive often (I know this because I hear people complain about this one constantly).

    Sorry to disagree, but the Sysadmins where I am wouldn't know if their asses were on fire. I'll take a Unix admin over a Windows bozo any day.

    AC

  390. Easy solution by ted_nugent · · Score: 1

    Look up your local LUG and find out when they are scheduling the next installfest.

    --

    Free the West Memphis Three!

  391. -2 Liar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, really amazing technology, IE is. Now take your pills and get back in your bed.

  392. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Phishpin · · Score: 1

    Firebird 0.6 doesn't do the double click thing. And it my experience, its as stable as Mozilla proper.

    --
    -phish
  393. Whew! What a relief. by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 2, Funny

    Personally, I can accept nothing less than having my nation's army be in full software licensing compliance while it bombs, invades and occupies other countries. It's the law!
    -
    I think you're some kind of deviated prevert. I think General Ripper found out about your preversion, and that you were organizing some kind of mutiny of preverts.

  394. Pork by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pork Pork Pork
    rinds

    liposuction for BillyG

  395. Shhhhh.. by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

    John Ashcroft is hiding amongst us

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  396. Say "goodbye" to Uncle Sam & "hello" to Uncle by grolschie · · Score: 1

    Say "goodbye" to Uncle Sam & "hello" to Uncle Bill!

    Xe! Xe! Xe!

  397. Famous space pen, huh? by ledestin · · Score: 1
    This should be modded as Funny +1 since every time the talk goes about inefficiency of the military/government spending this pen shows up.

    It's like, um, recurring post.

  398. those of us who have jobs? by alizard · · Score: 0

    And which job do you have, janitor or prostitute?

  399. usaf by mu51c10rd · · Score: 1

    Well, it's the Army, here in the Air Force, we use Red Hat and Sun Solaris around my area. Trying to train lots of grunts in the field whose sole purpose is to kill things and break stuff would not be cost effective and detract from their mission. Nothing wrong with the Windows licenses, until someone can come up with a viable way of moving a 1,000,000 person organization onto Linux.

  400. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    then slashdot is drawing the wrong croud.

    i need to find another site that isn't full of sheep like you.

  401. Re:Yeah Buddy!- former grunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hey former grunt.

    they didn't want you hurting yourself back then (thinking)

    we don't want you hurting yourself now.

  402. It will be a VERY tough job to patch all system by DotSpider · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can you imagine if a serious hole is found in M$ software, how can the army patch all computers in a short time?!

  403. Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought that's what WinNuke was for...

  404. Interesting by digitaltraveller · · Score: 1

    This would make my blood boil if I was an American taxpayer. 500 million dollars could hire or retrain 20000 junior sysadmins at $25,000/yr or 5000 for 4 years! And this is only their software purchase budget, who knows if the army already has money earmarked for labour as well.
    By downloading a copy of RH 9.0 and creative use of wine and/or vmware you could easily enhance service and security for a huge part of the military and cut costs. It just goes to show that indiscriminate military spending is just as bad as indiscriminate social spending.

  405. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by duplo · · Score: 1

    Because when I tried using netscape, all the java was broken (in my opinion) as none of my internet banking services worked any more. The tabbed browsing was great, but when I couldn't do the things I wanted to do I had to change back to IE.

  406. You would think they could get OEM pricing by dcavanaugh · · Score: 1

    Oh well, at least we know how much they could save by switching to open source.

  407. $400 toilet seats fund Black Ops by Confessed+Geek · · Score: 1

    Ok this is HearSay/Second hand, but what I had heard was that a general was expalining 10000 $400 toilet seats is actually a way of putting $390,000 into a black ops budget, i.e. things that for security (or more nefarious reasons) you can't list as a line item in your appropriations budget.

  408. Microsoft defeats US Army by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those old enough to remember: FTA

  409. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i wish slashdot would publish their impressions % broken down by OS used so people like you could STFU about using linux all the time when it comes in at 5% used.

  410. Auto vs manual? by HiggsBison · · Score: 1
    I thought he was ranting about how kids these days can't drive a stick. Wussy Hummers gotta have auto cause only a rocket scientist can shift gears manually. (/Arnold)

    Yes, I know they specified auto because they want it to work reliably no matter who, and no matter what.

    --
    My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
  411. Boondoggled Again! by Radical+Rad · · Score: 2, Funny

    They should have bought 494,000 $900 hammers. At least they would have something useful to show for it. And what do you want to bet some of the $471,000,000 ends up in the Bush Re-Election Campaign's coffers?

  412. Re:YOU ARE THE FAILURE!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arch that back! I said ARCH THAT BACK!
    What kind of pig are you, what kind of pig would do that? Babys a human toilet.. Babys a human toilet!!! Say it! Say your a human toilet. I am going to send you home to mommy bleeding from the asshole.

  413. QUALITY TIME!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    COME ON, YOU PEOPLE. YOU CHEAP PENNY CUNTS. YOU WORTHLESS SLUTS. YOU CHEAP WHORES. YOU REALLY ARE DISGUSTING, YOU REALLY ARE. [Can I fuck your virgin asshole bitch? I know you are hard at the thought of it!] WHAT'S THIS? WHAT'S THIS? YOU LIKE THAT, DON'T YOU? LOOK AT THAT. BEGGING FOR IT. COME ON DOWN AND BEG FOR IT, BABY. FUCKING WHORE!

  414. Re:Paying twice?/CSPAN by m0rphm0nkey · · Score: 1

    And you're not blocking CSPAN?

    HELP!! My tv crashes when the adds come on! (now if I could just get a keyboard hooked up to it)

    Surely you're not suggesting any large media news group isn't going to have slanted coverage, or that Anna Banana really loves Hot Todd Turnon and his 7 twin brothers just because she said so in "8 isn't enough".

  415. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by SlimFastForYou · · Score: 1

    At home, I only use Windows because of games.

    At work (today was first day working at an ISPs comp repair bench), my computer runs Windows. I *might* install the latest and gratest distrobution of Mandrake, but I may also keep Windows on the box, simply for the sake of testing procedures (if customer asks what menus to click on Outlook express, I can tell them). Perhaps I will install Cygwin, or perhaps I may give into the temptation of Mandrake.

    Theres a few slackware guys where I work.. better be careful or the command prompt will own me (more than it already does)!

  416. What? by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    I assure you autopr0n.com works perfictly well on most browsers and OSs!

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:What? by NeoGeo64 · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, thats a good site. I've been looking for a good pr0n site as of late. Having broadband and Kazaa (LITE!) is all good and well but to download high quality movies takes a little while. Added to bookmarks! ;)

  417. Imagine That by gnarly · · Score: 1

    The DoD paying more than necessary? Say it isn't so. Life's rough when you have to find some way to spend $1.17 BILLION (US) every day.

    --
    :-( is a registered trademark of Despair.com
  418. Government limits freedom by favoring MS software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why isn't Tony Stanco complaining about this?

  419. Pay taxes off that, pay salaries by melted · · Score: 1

    and there's not that much money left. If it's a 6 year contract, I think Microsoft is just breaking even on it.

  420. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by LordSah · · Score: 1

    Yep. And happy too.

    Windows does everything I want it to. I'd rather not take the time to configure a distro to suit my needs.

    And I won't ever go back to debugging with GDB :)

  421. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    I'll grant that it's a bit more work (which might dissuade some folks), but you can just install an NTLM proxy on your system.

  422. Oh, the irony! by adyus · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one here who got the Linux/Oracle ad on this page saying:

    "Want to know how you can save millions?"

  423. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    It's better than Outlook, and it's better than recent Media Player releases. That's about as far as I'll go.

  424. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    Use Control-L. I use it all the time in Galeon. Works a wonder.

  425. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    Linux has a Shoutcast server (as well as Icecast).

    Sort of by its nature isn't good for Windows compatibility testing, though.

  426. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    I've used more debuggers than I can count on my fingers, and while gdb isn't the best out there, I can't stand GUI debuggers. I haven't used any CLI Windows application-level debuggers.

  427. Herd mentality. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Of some IT people: if users can't use Windows then they will stop using computers if forced to do something else, oh yes, [tm].

    I have not seen evidence of this, but some people repeat it like a confirmed truism.

    In my personal experience, people that are not computer savvy do not care what they are using as long as what they have to do is explained on clear terms. Computer savvy people may roll their eyes ocassionally for taking them out of their comfort zone, but they carry along doing their work just fine.

    Explain that the money saved would have to be cut from other places otherwise (i.e. redundancies) and you will have the most willing learners you can imagine.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  428. armed forces a business???? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    What stupid assertion.

    Show us their balance sheet and their operational accounts wise boy...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  429. Clippy Says.... by Calathea · · Score: 1

    It appears you are trying to kill someone, would you like help with that? o Yes, kill them, kill them all o No Thanks I'll gut them myself.

  430. Interesting faq/troll. Want More Concrete Info! by mattr · · Score: 1
    Lots of interesting kneejerk respo^H^H^H posts from the military!

    It does seem the military could become the prime funder of open source with very little effort, as it is most likely heavily used already. All that is needed is a few more trolls, I mean ask slashdots, like this one and my company, er I mean the open source community, will quickly accumulate a critical mass of information about U.S. Army procurement procedure to swiftly overtake Bill / make so much money it needs scientific notation / significantly improve oss / hire some professional documentation writers (pick one or more).

    This has got to be one of the most intersting threads to get posts from people in the military, really. Maybe someone with some experience could provide more concrete information how to get oss' foot in the door, i.e. books/sites to study, areas of need, specific cases where oss is already used, etc. From the outside one would think that the military's gung-ho/can-do spirit would embrace superior options if they should exist, do not cost too much to introduce, and are well supported. How does OSS get into the next procurement cycle and grab a piece of the next half-bil or whatever is invested? Open Source does run on Windows you know, and it doesn't *have* to suck.

  431. Re:I'm an Army Sysadmin (doesn't mean jack) by mpe · · Score: 1

    I FULLY DISAGREE! Yes, I work in the industry too and all I can say is MOST of the problems are MICROSOFT (and poorly trained IT staff). Word crashes on a daily basis, DLL hell...

    Part of the problem is design of Windows which allows (even expects) the end user to carry out admin tasks. Even though the NT derived versions of Windows have file system protection often this needs to be turned off to enable any application which was written on the assumption it can do what it likes to work...
    A lot of problems just cannot happen when the end user (or a program run by them) cannot modify all sorts of things which don't need changing in the first place.

    I strongly disagree that Linux is inappropriate for the average user. 95% of the defence force use Word, Excel and Powerpoint - PERIOD! Now, Linux can hose that in easily with something like Open Office!!!

    Other common activities are email and web browsing. These can be set up to "just work" with Linux. As opposed to expecting the user to know what POP3, IMAP, SMTP, proxy servers, their own email address, etc are.

  432. Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a waste of money. Think, tehy also need another 400+ million to secure the devices.

  433. Reasonable asumption, an asumption just the same by Felinoid · · Score: 1

    It is a reasonable assumption to think this is the case. Off the shelf systems are with Windows and office preinstalled and then the united states military needs a fresh military previewed version so they do pay twice. If this is the case.

    But they may be buying them for non-critical functions or buying blank consumer hardware.

    Or buying systems with GASP SCO Unixware preinstalled.... (Said for ironys sake) or HPUX or Solarus or what ever operating system they feel they need to get the job done.

    --
    I don't actually exist.
  434. Reality Recheck by mobileskimo · · Score: 1

    I would have to agree that bottom line and practicality MS is the right choice. I stated so. No need to repeat that. I merely stated that Linux proponents have their say and trying to stomp on their viewpoints won't win any votes.

    Does it realy matter if the "unpractical" are heard? Yes. If you are considering a purchase of a honda civic does it really matter to you that there are mercedez-benz' in the world?

    If you've been around since the days of Windows3.1 I don't understand where you've failed to grasp the concept of how this operating system was designed, developed and continues to carry inherent flaws that impede its acceptance among those that would strive for better kernel core and memory access design principles (not to mention software development practices), and would attempt to convince those working in such organizations that we trust to strive for excellence.

    I'd say I'm a pretty reasonable judge of how stable or secure Windows is since I've seen it through many iterations.

    Compared to other versions of windows? Please explain.

    The functions that are performed by a majority of windows users in the army may or may not be critical. However it is apparent that you have little grasp of security policy concepts if you think

    [1] Windows can be just as secure as Linux. Let me give you just a small example: Most of the virus alerts have iterated repeatedly, "Linux and Macs are immune to this threat.". You wanted bottom line? There's a bottomline for you.
    [2] Just because Windows has received Rainbow book certification for security, that this makes it secure. It only certifies that the controls, mechanisms and tools are there to make it so. It does not provide any measure of comfort since it states nothing about whether the implementation or actual use can be achieved. If you design a lock and a key device but provide no doors that have a frame to fit the lock, its useless. *nix has had the mechanisms for a very long time, developers have a long history of experience with it, must deal with it all the time (to some annoyance), and is far more visible and pervasive.
    [3] Security of noncritical systems do not affect the security of critical systems in the network vacinity. This is the number one goal of hackers and viruses. Get your foot in the door by finding an open one. Cracking into a secure one can then procede from the open one.

    What, you thought you could just take an out-of-the-box Linux install and be good to go? Come on.

    Default security of default installs of Windows and Linux compared, I would pick Linux over windows any day. Neither being secure (there is no secure, there is less secure, and there is more secure), you think out-of-the-box has no impact on the final configuration? YOU cmon. We all know what the person installing it should do, go through a checklist and assure that measures and compliance to contract and procedures, blah blah blah. We all know how it ends up though. Want a real reality check?

    You've made no alotment for human behavior and statistical probability of errors. Something that I expect military institutions to be astute in ascertaining.

    --
    "Last one in is a rotten goblin!" - Kepp
  435. Re:Yeah Buddy!- former grunt by 2short · · Score: 1

    Right. Well, I did read his post, dumbass, and if you had bothered to think while reading mine, you'd understand that I am saying, "What the hell does a hypothetical that never has happened or will happen have to do with anything?" See, he was claiming some sort of authority because he was a "former grunt", and I was calling that into question by pointing out that his silly concocted example had no relationship to anything he, or any other grunt, had had to deal with. Next time I'll spell it out in a long boring paragraph full of small words so you'll understand. And I'll be sure to emphasize every other word with asterisks.

    Nobody is "hacking" in a foxhole under fire. If anyone is using a computer under those conditions at all, it's to glance briefly at some app displaying tactical info. Maybe. The Army does a lot of things bass-ackwards, but one thing they're pretty good with is what you should be doing in a foxhole while being shot at. Using a keyboard is not on the list.

  436. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

    That would be a cool feature to add to Slashcode, actually... imagine a button to show you the browser/OS histogram for any individual story. Analyze which platform correlates to interest in other topics, or predict future desktop software trends.

    A more invasive version (but still cool) would be to get a browser history of a certain user. (Of course, that's easy to fake)

  437. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  438. 6 years equals upgrades by mindmatters · · Score: 1

    The Microsoft deal is for 6 years - the equipment for 3. Sounds to me like the $951 figure may include software updates. Or perhaps provisions for future hardware purchases.

  439. Hey US basher... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    What do you expect from Army,which bombs innocent civilians of other countries?
    In English, we use that little thing called an "article adjective". You should have said "the Army". I won't even attempt to address your crazy "bombs innocent civilians" comment. Geez. I wouldn't mind your critique so much if you were from this country.
  440. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny. Both my wireless and winmodem work under Linux.

  441. Re:Anyone here use Win for anything other than gam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't get it to work for me. New 1.4 doesn't do anything differently than before.