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.
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
"so the Army will be paying twice for each machine"
/. is slanted. It still irritates me though.
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
Holy s-, it's Jesus!
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
My journal has hot
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.
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?
$471,000,000 dollars? That's like SIXTEEN hammers!
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
The deal $970 per seat includes OS, Exchange, SQL, and Office so that's about right.
t military25.html
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_msf
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
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?"
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
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Insert "Insert Joke" Joke here.
sin(6cos(r)+5A)
$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.
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
But a recent West Wing episode pops into my head.
Anyway, I've looked at military spending differently since that episode...
Oh, and Microsoft sucks... blah, blah, blah...
Davak
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
"what, you think they really paid $700 for a hammer?"--judd hirsh, independence day.
Personally I would rather see the money spent on smart bombs that minimalize civilian casualties. While I'm no lover of war, when it's necessary, I personally think killing less innocent people is good. So them spending huge amounts of money on insecure microsoft software seems like a terrible thing to me. Sure if we don't have any weapons we don't go to war, but we do need to defend ourselves. And that's half a billion dollars that isn't going into research giving real technical people jobs. Instead, it's going to Microsoft who will not hire new people because of this, but will most likely use half a billion dollars to destroy other smaller companies that get in it's way. So instead of creating jobs in research and development we are giving loads of money to a known abusive monopoly holder who will most likely use it to put good people out of work. I think the smart bombs have a smaller casualty rate personally.
Yeah, the new one is "Who do you want to go to war with today?"
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
Keith Hodson, a Microsoft spokesman, said the contract could help the Army reduce its costs and "validates the Army's belief in our security model."
I can't wait to see this. I'm not sure if the Army will be significant enough pressure to make m$ 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..
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
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.
...reboot per day. At least the rifles aren't running Windows yet.
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.
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");
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.
For that kind of money, they could have bought a new G5!
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.
/. 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.
I read with humour, the angry pro MS crowd who regularly vent their anger here on
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.
Insert "Recursive Joke" Joke Here
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
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."
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
I'm really impressed. Microsoft must really have it on the ball. An organization known to pay $800 for a hammer chose Microsoft as their software vendor.
So what if you have to call a tow truck every once in a while..
Speak before you think
Yeah, only those of us who have jobs and don't live in our parents' basement use Windows.
Is there anyone on Slashdot that hangs onto Windows for anything other than games?
Work.
http://use.perl.org
What...are you FUCKING kidding? This is basically worst-case scenario when it comes to security. Anybody remember M$ offering their source to China? Hello, McFly?
Whereas Linux source code is entirely beyond China's reach?
-j
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
The World's Worst Webcomic!
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.
m
See http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.ht
for the full story
Christ, not everything is a corporate-pandering conspiracy theory.
Or is that what they want us to beileve.
http://use.perl.org
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
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.
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.)
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
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