Slashdot Mirror


Apple Polishing Mac OS X for Uncle Sam?

polarfleece writes "A report on Macteens that the latest build of Panther contains strong evidence that it is being customized for U.S. Government applications. I, for one, can't wait to see a whole lot of Apples being toted by gummint men (and women). Of course, do we REALLY want those gummint agents having access to the same technology we Apple users enjoy so much? On the other hand, to quote story author Clark Mueller, 'it just might be one of the more intelligent steps taken towards U.S. national defense.'"

91 comments

  1. Well ain't that cute... BUT IT'S WRONG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I, for one, can't wait to see a whole lot of Apples being toted by gummint men (and women).

    Shouldn't that be: I, for one, welcome our new apple toting overlords!

    1. Re:Well ain't that cute... BUT IT'S WRONG! by kilgore_47 · · Score: 1

      I reckon the feds must be buying something from apple, anyway...

      --
      ___
      The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
    2. Re:Well ain't that cute... BUT IT'S WRONG! by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      I, for one, welcome our new apple toting overlords!

      Hey, insect, alien, and machine overlords are one thing, but you're actually welcoming gummint overlords?!? That's going too far!

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  2. embedded images? by udecker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm beginning to wonder why Apple would include items such as Department of Public Health and U.S. Army logos within the login panel, when individual customizations are usually done after installation?

    Does microsoft embed specialized content for "preferred rollout" people in Windows as well?

    Perhaps this is just a kitchen sink issue, and the release builds will not contain such images?

    1. Re:embedded images? by patman600 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The fact that they have every logo in there suggests to me that they will not have specialized builds, but just include them into the OS. If they were going to have specialized builds I would think that they would just have a specialized build for each division. Since they are just icons, and only take up a miniscule amount of space it seems easier to just have them in the commercial OS.

    2. Re:embedded images? by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      More likely the directories with those files will be hidden but easily available, what a great idea!

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  3. Nice move by bigman8 · · Score: 1, Funny

    As a government employee, I'd love to see more Macs around here. This Windows stuff gets old after a while.

    1. Re:Nice move by IM6100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do the Bostisch Staplers, Canon photocopier, and 'HON' filing cabinets get old, too?

      Geez.

      It's just office equipment .

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    2. Re:Nice move by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, when the staplers start randomly putting staples through people's hands, the photocopiers suck people in and spit them out in neatly collated slices, and the filing cabinets show an alarming tendency to decapitate the temps ... it might be time to start looking for alternative brands.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Nice move by mkldev · · Score: 2, Funny
      If you take my stapler, I'll burn the place down.

      --
      120 character sigs suck. Make it 250.
    4. Re:Nice move by Nutrimentia · · Score: 1

      FWIW, I caught the reference. No mod points today, even though it made me smile.

  4. This should not come as a surprise by Dan+Ost · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The US government is one of the single largest consumers of computer
    systems in the world. Is it really surprising that Apple might make
    an effort to court it?

    --

    *sigh* back to work...
    1. Re:This should not come as a surprise by beetle496 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Federal Government won't be purchasing OS X boxes in mass quantity until the operating system is usable by somebody who is blind. E&IT Accessibility Standards

      --
      I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
  5. Gummint Mac use by nystagman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    For eight years I have had to battle tooth and nail to push my Mac purchases through, in contradiction of the VA's official approved platform BS. It's not impossible, merely ludicrously convoluted.

    As I am a researcher, not an "information worker," (irony at its finest) my argument has always been that I know better what I need to do my job, than does some IT clown who wouldn't know scientific computing if it bit him on the ass. Yet EVERY computer-related purchase (right down to a cable or toner cartridge) must receive IT approval at some central location before it then takes weeks/months to actually GET purchased.

    One thing that has helped is that I have completely segregated our laboratory network from the hospital network (which, by the way, for the longest time used unsecured WiFi until I showed them how easy it was to rummage around), thereby avoiding having to suffer through the mandated computer "training," which I can assure you is a complete waste of time, energy and money.

    The IT guys here all know me, and are amused by me attempts to keep the lab Mac-based. I, on the other hand, am always amused by the nonstop labor on their part to keep the wintel stuff from falling apart. (Blaster, anyone?)

    I hope that this offical addition of OS X to the supported list will make it easier for me to buy some G5s soon... Then I can pass some G4s down the line to the "Medical Media" (graphics) department, who were forced to switch from Macs several years ago. Not a popular decision. Not in the least.

    --
    Theory and practice are the same in theory, but different in practice.
    1. Re:Gummint Mac use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      be careful how you word such requests. example (from a gov't organization):

      my boss once ordered a "mac flatscreen". request denied: you don't need a flatscreen monitor.

      the boss then ordered a "cinema display" (the same thing). response: here ya go! have a good day sir.

    2. Re:Gummint Mac use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, I'll feed the troll. "If they did not patch that is their fault, not MSs" - whose fault is it that such an egregious flaw existed in the OS since pre NT-4? Microsoft's internal development philosophy has never included security at the design level, it has always been an afterthought. Oh, about the photoshop thing, go look up some benchmarks instead of just asserting some nonsensical claim. The vector unit on the G4 was designed for parallel processing intensive tasks, and intel's extension of the day (SSE[1-2], MMX etc.) are again, afterthoughts.

    3. Re:Gummint Mac use by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Years ago, when I started working in the Public Sector I remeber there was a place that would sell PowerMac G3s in special configurations for schools, local government and the Federal Government who didn't allow Macs to be bought.

      The included a CD of either AIX or MKLinux and were billed on FRPs and Invoices as "Unix RISC Workstations".

      They were reboxed so that receiving wouldn't see the Apple boxes, but in all other reguards were G3 Minitower PowerMacs.

    4. Re:Gummint Mac use by Cipster · · Score: 1

      As a fellow VA employee/researcher I feel your pain. Our labs are outfitted with Dells running Windows 2000. Not horrible but a lot of software I run is Linux only so I bring in my laptop and a USB external Zip drive in case I need to download something.
      Ordering anything involves getting signatures from three different offices and much annoyance.

    5. Re:Gummint Mac use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Okay, I'll feed the troll. "If they did not patch that is their fault, not MSs" - whose fault is it that such an egregious flaw existed in the OS since pre NT-4?"

      Microsoft's and Apple's little iTunes upgrade corrupted hardrives not to long ago. Your point is moot. Patches or new releases are issued it is up to administrators to roll them out.

      "Microsoft's internal development philosophy has never included security at the design level, it has always been an afterthought."

      Ya tell that to the NT folks. I could name ten good security principals that were part of the design philosophy. If YOU cannot perhaps YOU should stop spewing garbage.

      "Oh, about the photoshop thing, go look up some benchmarks instead of just asserting some nonsensical claim. The vector unit on the G4 was designed for parallel processing intensive tasks, and intel's extension of the day (SSE[1-2], MMX etc.) are again, afterthoughts."

      HyperThreading is the "extentension of the day" and it is hardly an after thought. What is an afterthought is Adobe's poor handling of PhotoShop on the Windows platform. BTW I am glad your plaform de jour finally has a new CPU after how many months of stagnation? It must be nice to finally be able enjoy the fruits of a secondary source for CPU's.

    6. Re:Gummint Mac use by indypharmd · · Score: 1

      Why don't you just utilize VPN? You can at least get an analog modem and do the old dial-up method to get a VPN connection if your IT folks won't lease you a connection to the lan...

    7. Re:Gummint Mac use by filmsmith · · Score: 1

      BTW I am glad your plaform de jour finally has a new CPU after how many months of stagnation?

      By the way, I'm glad you're platform de jour will finally be getting a new os after how many YEARS of stagnation?

      -1 Shut your hole!

    8. Re:Gummint Mac use by zvoid · · Score: 1

      Something's up. When I got my certification for my ACTC a couple of months ago, I sat next to an army guy who was sent there (under protestation) to evaluate OSX for Army use.. One can only hope//

  6. Navy Intranet? by bluethundr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This sounds really wonderful for the implementation of Apple Hardware by Uncle Sam. But one Gov't market the likley won't be able to penetrate is that of the Navy/Marine Corp intranet! That is one bigass contract they are not going to be able to take advantage of because of the decision to standardize on Windoze 2000. "Angels and ministers of grace, defend us!"

    As reported in this older /. story it's the largest federal IT project ever undertaken! The goal is to get as many people as they could up to a reasonable level of modernity. Some of those sorry fuckers are STILL using wordstar and the tech of similar vintage! So I guess that even Win2k would be somewhat of an improvementin those select cases. I'll bet however that some of the other branches are going to have to give up their brand new Apple hardware due to the new standardization (those mil outfits are a true tower of Babel!) are going to be *reeeealllly* unhappy!

    The Navy/Marine Corps intranet is being used as a template for the tech that the "Dept. Of Homeland Security" will use. Fortunatley, for the time being anyway, that department seems as largely fictional as the name is ominous. Fictional in the sense that the departments that are supposed to be talking to one another in a free flow of information...aren't. Not even to mention that in true 'big gov't' fashion the project is massively over budget and deadlines keep getting pushed back further and further.

    Go Uncle Sam! *yeesh*

    --
    Quod scripsi, scripsi.
    1. Re:Navy Intranet? by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Wasn't there a recent /. article about using Mac OS/X servers on Subs to do visualization? Seems they can't be too hardcore about w2k if this is true.

    2. Re:Navy Intranet? by Kirkster13 · · Score: 1

      The NMCI is the biggest joke going out there right now. Over Budget and Late but this is EDS that we are talking about... NMCI will not get extended in fact the Marines are already opting out parts of the grand plan.

      The bases are getting less services for more money. Welcome to single party solutions...

    3. Re:Navy Intranet? by quickMac · · Score: 1

      There are exceptions to the NMCI rules. One is if the Systems will never touch the NMCI infrastructure. We are in the process of moving our Solaris apps to Mac OS X. They are used to perform acoustic data processing. I was able to get this through by showing that I could get the apps to run by doing a simple recompile it worked. In reality it has taken a few weeks to achieve bug for bug compatibility. The second factor was that a comparable sun was $8K vs the $2.2k for a single processor xServe( Through the government store at Apple).

    4. Re:Navy Intranet? by silvakow · · Score: 1

      Well, we've been fighting for roughly 230 years and we're still kicking ass. I agree that Win2k sucks, but it's like the horrible un-reliable applications used for airplanes to communicate with the landing tower: the human brain always takes up the slack. Maybe people would start relying more on technology and less on intelligence if they ran anything more stable, eh?

      --
      In the long run, we're all dead.
  7. Great for enterprise use by dschuetz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I used to support a three-letter-agency (I still can't bring myself to say it out loud :) ), and we were 100% NeXTSTEP on the desktop.

    It was fantastic -- trivial to administer, and every machine was configured such that absolutely no user-specific data or configuration information was stored on the local desktop. You could log in to your officemate's computer, another one down the hall, or clear across the country, and everything was exactly as if you were at your own desk (though cross-country use was a little slow at times). This is something I've never seen done with Windows.

    It also made changing out hardware in case of failure a no-brainer -- grab a spare slab out of the closet on your way to the person's office, power down, swap units, power up, leave. 15 minutes, tops.

    Just about all the users loved the system, too (imagine! Secretaries, using UNIX! :) ), but they all wanted Microsoft Office on it -- that was the main reason they finally dropped NeXT for Windows (well, that, plus NeXT pretty much closing up shop to remake apple).

    Anyway, if the MacOS X boxes are anywhere near as reliable and easy to manage as NeXT was, then I'd really hope that Apple starts to push the enterprise angle stronger....

    1. Re:Great for enterprise use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Well since MacOS X *IS* NeXTSTEP (except it can run Office!) I think your unnamed agency would pick it up with no problem and run their code cracking software (or whatever they want, I have no idea which agency it is ;-) with minimal changes.

      The NeXT has/had *THE* best OS and development environment and I'm so glad it lives on in Mac OS X. Using project builder I can write complete, beautiful apps in an *afternoon*. I still can't be as productive with Java & Eclipse or vi and Perl/Ruby etc. Those NeXT engineers really knew what they were doing.

    2. Re:Great for enterprise use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The agency in question wouldn't happen to be the CIA? They were a huge NeXT customer.

      The FBI and LAPD (I know, 4 letters) - were also large customers as well, but I think the CIA was the biggest.

      just wondering.....

    3. Re:Great for enterprise use by BWJones · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just about all the users loved the system, too (imagine! Secretaries, using UNIX! :) )

      Ahhhh, now I know you are talking CIA. This actually surprised me back in 1991 or 1992 to see NeXT slabs on secretaries desks, but I thought it was very cool (I liked the Cubes). Aside from the rather interesting angle that certain current Apple fellows (former NeXT employees) had with cryptography, the security, built in scriptability, built in optical storage and other obvious choices for a critical, yet secure installation, NeXT had those cool black cases. :-) The running joke among the spook crowd was that that the black cases were the sole reason for the contract.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    4. Re:Great for enterprise use by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 1


      You can do exactly this with Mac OS X Server; now called the process is called NetBoot, I dunno what it was called at NeXT.

      When one was hosting OS 9 clients from OS X Server 1.2, the clients could be diskless. Now, however, OS X 10.2 clients require a local drive, but just for swap; everything else is on the server--which could be in a locked closet, as you mention. And the local swap isn't even necessary with Server 10.3--hm, maybe Apple removed that requirement by request of a specific client?

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    5. Re:Great for enterprise use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, given his circumspection, it's probably the NSA. They were -- still -- on NeXT boxes (among other brands) as of a few years ago.

    6. Re:Great for enterprise use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You obvously have never heard of a Windows NT domain and a roaming profile. You can do what you described on Windows quite easily. I admin such a setup for a living.

    7. Re:Great for enterprise use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both of those organizations had NeXT enclaves, as well as a couple others that may be the cause of circumspetion. They shared a network and IT infrastructure because they had similar missions. They began a Windows transition in 2000 or so.

  8. Lockout? by secolactico · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Of course, "everyone" is saying that the desicion to standarize on Win2k is wrong because it ties you to a single software vendor (Microsoft). Wouldn't the adoption of Apple tie you down to a single software *and* hardware vendor?

    --
    No sig
    1. Re:Lockout? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What I find interesting about this post is the assumption that there has to be a single vendor for anything. This mindset seems to me to be the product of the Microsoft era; I don't know how many comments I've seen, in many different contexts, of the "Well, replacing Microsoft with ___ would be just as bad." ("___" is usually Apple, although I've seen Sun and, lately, Red Hat.) In fact, of course, "Microsoft or ___" is a false dichotomy. Buyers -- especially government buyers, although I'd argue that large business acquisitions should follow this policy too -- should insist on interoperability standards which all vendors will follow, and then pick and choose systems that meet these standards, making a deliberate effort to avoid vendor lock-in and the "monoculture crop" security problems that inevitably follow. There's no good reason that a single organization can't have machines running Windows, OS X, Solaris, Linux, and God knows what else sitting side-by-side and working with each other, as long as buyers insist on it.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Lockout? by imnoteddy · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Of course, "everyone" is saying that the desicion to standarize on Win2k is wrong because it ties you to a single software vendor (Microsoft). Wouldn't the adoption of Apple tie you down to a single software *and* hardware vendor?

      Only if you had a "Mac only" policy. It is better to allow the best tool for the job rather than mandate a monoculture.

      --
      No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
    3. Re:Lockout? by NaugaHunter · · Score: 1

      I think the difference is in what's implied - standardizing on Win2K also results in standardizing in MS Outlook, MS Office, MS SQL, MS IIS, MS Printer Sharing etc. While Apple offers alternatives to these that are included, many (e.g. MySQL, Apache, CUPS) are open source and widely supported/modifyable. So if you take the OS as part of the hardware (true from a certain point of view), you are more free to use any other software on top of it. Especially if you throw a Unix base and X11 into the curve (for legacy apps), and a FREE Full-featured development environment (Project Developer w/ Applescript, Cocoa, Carbon, and others).

      On top off all that, the simpler (and probably cheaper) licensing scheme should help a lot, once it's widely know that the apps are there.

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    4. Re:Lockout? by Isbiten · · Score: 1

      Buying only Win2k would mean a another hardware lockout, x86 hardware only?

      --
      I fought the corporate America, and the corporate America bought the law.
    5. Re:Lockout? by fermion · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Actually, in my experience the only time one gets a 'single vendor' policy is if one uses MS. Even in the old days, Apple products inter-operated with other machines unless those machines were specifically designed to work only with PCs. And if they were, one found that they were obsolete much faster than general machines.

      With OS x the choice becomes even greater. The Mac has entered the *nix community and represents choice for the user. Web boxes do not have to be running IIS with the accompanying license and month patches, but can be Apache boxes with reliable support contracts. For the data entry person, a x86 Linux box running thin net to the application and data. More secure that a full fledged Windows box in which the person has rapid access to all the data. For the superuser who needs more box, a Mac or even Sun Blade. Oracle or MySql would handle the database needs. Standardize on MS Office and StarOffice. Administration is the pretty much the same on all machines. The kernel is customizable, and shell commands can be added or subtracted as need.

      Hell, you can even put in some windows machines for the apps that require it.

      No MS is the definition of single source. Everyone else knows how to play together.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    6. Re:Lockout? by tres · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Lock" is the key word here. If you look at the way that OS X is built, you see that Apple isn't trying to lock anything. They're pushing a hardware platform that can interoperate with your pre-existing legacy systems. They're doing it by using open standards and open source.

      Really, I think you're mixing Apples and oranges. When you talk about a vendor lock in, it's where systems aren't interoperable with software or equipment from other vendors. If you want to use a BSD or Linux server on your network, OS X will work quite well with it. If you want to put a Windows server on your network, OS X will work quite well with that. It goes the same for our UNIX cousins. By utilizing open standards, Apple has made a system that doesn't lock you in to any vendor.

      This is where Apple "gets it," and Microsoft never will. Using open source and open standards gives the users the choice, not the vendor. When the entire commodity of your company is based on "intellectual property," when there are no tangible items being traded for money, of course you're locked into protecting that property by locking other people out of it.

      When you are providing a real good, i.e. computer hardware, you don't have all the restrictions that tie up a company like Microsoft, that tries to sell intangibles as if they were goods. As a hardware vendor, you want to provide people with the ability to integrate your systems into different environments. Making your system more extensible means that you will sell more.

      I think this was a hard lesson for Apple to learn, it almost drove them out of business in the '90s, but it seems evident that Apple doesn't intend to lock anyone in or out.

      --
      Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us
    7. Re:Lockout? by phillymjs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wouldn't the adoption of Apple tie you down to a single software *and* hardware vendor?

      Perhaps, but only for the client machines. Thanks to Apple's wholehearted adoption of open standards, you can mix and match to form the rest of your network, if you desire-- whereas Microsoft's stuff only plays nice with competitors' products grudgingly, when it plays nice at all.

      ~Philly

    8. Re:Lockout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are windows versions of MySQL and Apache along with most open-source applications. I actually think of anything that doesn't have its equivalence in Windows.

    9. Re:Lockout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try but last I checked there are two major x86 vendors and neither of them are Microsoft. There are also dozens of motherboard manufacturers (again not Microsoft). You also have several options with each processor manufacturer (i.e. Celeron, Pentium, Xeon). I also can choose to build my own machine without any Microsoft hardware and without hacking everything together and it will cost less than buying it pre-built.

    10. Re:Lockout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are all Mac users idiots? There are tens of thousands of websites that use Apache on Windows. I am sure that many use MySQL too. StarOffice and OpenOffice also work in Windows. And what are you talking about with the thin client? Security is what you make it. How does a Windows user have "rapid access to all data" unless you set it up that way.

      And Microsoft gets along just fine with *nix, OS X, and OS 9. I should know because we have Solaris, AIX, OS X, OS 9, Win2k, WinNT 4, Win98 all playing together very nicely.

      Sometimes I wonder who spreads more FUD. Microsoft or Mac freaks.

    11. Re:Lockout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      are all windows users illiterate?

      the point obviously was that a Mac does not lock one in any more than a windows, which was a direct response to the original comments. You proved that point.

      In many offices, however, there is a notion that MS only has an advantage because of a common management scheme. Again, in direct response to the original assertion, a valid observation was made that OS X has the advantage of, at some level, using the same skillset of other *nix., another point that was refuted.

      Also, the original comment specifically spoke of single vendor lock in. It is very common for a firm to purchase a Windows system, install an MS webserver, an MS database, and develop with MS tools. This is what the original post probably was speaking to. If a firm purchases a Windows system then installs MySQL and Apache, then the firm is no longer tied to a single software vendor, and the case in the original post does not apply, unless they like many comapnies only use MS Windows.

      Again, the response only tangentially spoke of Windows. The main thrust was that Apple can be a part of an efficient diversified IT setup. It would be useful to add, however, that given MS licensing schemes and increasingly aggressive marketing, one can assume that most shops would find it easier to single source, especially if, as in the case of dual booting machines, alternatives would anger the MS salesforce.

    12. Re:Lockout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illiterate?

      Actually, in my experience the only time one gets a 'single vendor' policy is if one uses MS.

      Very first line.

  9. White Hats vs. Black Hats by Frightened_Turtle · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, as anyone can tell you, the movies always show the good guys using Macs, and the bad guys using Windoze.

    So if government types start using Macs, that'll mean that the good guys are taking over! Woo! Hoo! (I love how the sun always shines in my own little reality...)

    --


    Whew! This water sure is cold!
  10. Has to be the IRS by mhesseltine · · Score: 1

    Where else would you feel ashamed to admit that you work?

    Well, besides OSDN.

    --
    Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
  11. oh you americans by BortQ · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Now that it's becoming uncool to buy microsoft because of their egregious security (even though they are an american company) it's good to see that the US gov is turning to another american company to throw their moneys at.

    Not that I blame them. One of the jobs of government is to promote local businesses. The US would do well to develop many different competing computer platforms, rather then have all their eggs in one (shoddy) basket.

    I'm also pleased that some other governments (germany, some asian ones) are trying to do the same. Perhaps we may have a range of interoperating platforms after all!

    --

    A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
    1. Re:oh you americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Now that it's becoming uncool to buy microsoft because of their egregious security (even though they are an american company) it's good to see that the US gov is turning to another american company to throw their moneys at.

      Yes, they are turning to one that is more secure. I don't know; it makes sense to me. I don't think that because one company is deficient, they should never talk with another again.

      Also, "oh you americans" is really quite insulting.

    2. Re:oh you americans by G4from128k · · Score: 1

      The rest-of-the-world will get its last laugh. I'd bet the vast majority of money spent on "American" technology products never goes to American workers. Most of the hardware is fabricated in the Far East, Mexico, etc. Even the software and tech support is moving off-shore.

      Won't long before the only America labor in a tech product is the lawyer's billables for the EULA.

      --
      Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  12. Seems unlikely to me - probably a demo build by Angostura · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Yes, Seems an extraordinary decision to me, if this is right. I suspect that something is being mis-reported here. What does Apple do when the Department of Whatever becomes a customer, patch the general distribution of Mac OS X? That sounds sensible, and scalable - not.

    Surely Apple would be much more lilely to create a separate 'Government Edition installer' that wouldlet the customer define a logo for the start-up screen and a message etc.

    I suspect this build has some demo code in it, or that someone is pulling someone's leg.

  13. Bo$tich sucks! by SYFer · · Score: 5, Funny

    You obviously haven't used a Swingline 37860 Easy Touch. The Swinglines are so much more innovative than the Bostich and the designs are more elegant and forward-looking as well.

    Most Bo$tich users bash Swinglines without ever having really used them beyond the ubiquitous consumer "Tot 50" model they had as a kid. Believe me, pro-level Swinglines can "ream-crunch" just as well as the Bostich line!

    The old straw-man arguments over refill compatibility have long since been resolved and the myth that Swinglines cost more to buy and maintain was put to rest with the redesign of the famous 747 Business Stapler series.

    When I was forced to use a "Bo$t-bitch" for my job, it jammed constantly--and always at the wrong time. My Swingline has been operating jam-free for 19 straight days (and I AM a pro user).

    PS: Anyone hear about the possibility that SL might roll out a water-cooled electric at the Paris Office Machines Fair? That would blow the springs out of any current BS device!

    --
    "...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
    1. Re:Bo$tich sucks! by mithras+the+prophet · · Score: 1

      That was funny, thanks.

      --
      four nine eighteen twenty-7 thirty-nine forty-7 fiftyeight sixty-nine seventy-9 eighty-8 one-hundred-and-nine one-twenty
    2. Re:Bo$tich sucks! by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't know what's with you Swingline fanatics. I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Swingline 37860 Easy Touch trying to staple 17 pages together for the past twenty minutes....

      ahh, forget it.

    3. Re:Bo$tich sucks! by Chaset · · Score: 2, Interesting
      This totally reminded me of a little cartoon I drew one time. I wish I'd kept it. It was a cover of a hypothetical "Stapler Monthly", with headlines such as "The New Swingline 447, is it Worth the Wait?", "Shootout: 20 latest Staple Removers Compared", "Stapling Tips: 20 do's and don'ts", "2003 Product Guide Issue"

      The sutbtle point of the cartoon was that non-enthusiasts of any given topic will never understand the enthusiasts. (In this case, taken to the extreme with staplers.)

      --
      -- "This world is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel."
    4. Re:Bo$tich sucks! by the+argonaut · · Score: 1

      first the original poster, and now this - i laughed so hard i almost shat my pants...

      it's nice to see some of the posts that get modded funny really ARE funny...

      kudos to you my friend...

      --
      fuck you.
  14. Finally, tax payers money go in to good use! by Hackie_Chan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Have you guys read the EULA you have to agree when installing Mac OS X? It says that you can't use it in anyway in connection to flight controls or nuclear facilities, or any form of weapon of mass destruction. So much for putting Macs in to the coolest agencies...

    Seems to me that the reason why the Navy used Linux on their newly acquired Xserves were because they couldn't use Mac OS X without violating the contract!

    Oh, but maybe you think this maybe be the reason to all this?

    Or maybe it's because the government wants to become "hip" again? :)

    --

    What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
    1. Re:Finally, tax payers money go in to good use! by confused+one · · Score: 1
      God, I wouldn't want OS X, Linux or w2k being used in connection with flight controls or nuclear facilities. Not unless it was fully certified for real-time fault tolerant use!!!

      Man, don't scare me like that. You're one of those guys who puts Windows based machines in control of dangerous equipment, aren't you.

  15. Apple Polishing Mac OS X for Uncle Sam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple Polishing Mac OS X for Uncle Sam?

    More like Uncle Scam?

  16. Apple in the Military by TrippTDF · · Score: 2, Funny

    iGrenade (shaped like everyone's favorite logo, in one of five fruity colors)

    iMine (out of the box and into the ground in 10 minutes)

    iTank (now with 40 GB hard drive to store 10,000 of your favorite songs while you drive around the desert and kill people)

    1. Re:Apple in the Military by jlaxson · · Score: 1

      Don't forget:

      iSub (the world's fastest nuclear submarine) (and a helluva lot quieter than previous models)

      --
      On Apple Input Peripherals: They're okay, I guess, but I was really hoping for a one-key keyboard and a 109-button mouse
  17. The real reason? by defunc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about it's good to have an ex VP on your board of directors to help you connect with the right people? Don't mean to minimize Apple's OS effort, but worth a thought...

    --
    .defuncrc
    1. Re:The real reason? by stingerman101 · · Score: 1

      especially since most gov't employees besides the military are dems (big govt is self-serving after-all).

  18. Obvious /. answer by AvantLegion · · Score: 2, Funny
    Of course, "everyone" is saying that the desicion to standarize on Win2k is wrong because it ties you to a single software vendor (Microsoft). Wouldn't the adoption of Apple tie you down to a single software *and* hardware vendor?

    But... but.... Apple, good!
    Microsoft, bad!

  19. Why the government? by ElGanzoLoco · · Score: 1

    Isn't Apple simply trying to follow / benefit from the rise of patriotism in America? I know a lot of people who would use these icons (particularly 15-year-old l33t ha>orZ who watch "Alias" and Stargate too much)...

    --
    Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
  20. Yes, but in a GOOD way! by MarcQuadra · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Think of this:
    Government chooses Apple, gets 'integrated' solution and support for hardware and software. No more 'ping pong' between hardware and software vendors.

    Also, Apple is the 'little guy' in that situation, they would be able to focus on their biggest client's needs, while MS has to be everything to everyone. If Uncle Sam says 'Jump' Apple would ask 'how high?' while Microsoft says 'maybe later!'

    Using the 'underdog' is often the best way to get top-notch service, I work for a small company contracting on Citizens Bank, we all absoultely bust ass to make 'big brother' happy, while our larger competition has much bigger things to worry about. Sure, Citizens pays a bit more for us, but the VALUE is much better.

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  21. Macs are BACK by macguiguru · · Score: 0
    You go booey!

    I've been working as a web developer at a company completely dominated by Wintel-me-it-aint-so boxes and have been lucky enough to have a Mac G3.

    I too found it amusing to watch the PC-zealots grinding themselves into dust again and again and again. Hell, I even got recruited to help out at the help desk during the recent virus hoo-haw. LOL!!!!

    Keep fighting.

    It's worth it.

    www.macwebguru.com

  22. Don't forget... by macguiguru · · Score: 0

    AtomBombXP - guaranteed to explode.

  23. Not true by macguiguru · · Score: 1, Funny

    There are NO Macs on NCC 1701(any letter).

    1. Re:Not true by 47Ronin · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Tuvak loves his Apple Studio Display.

      http://www.drissman.com/avi/misc/voyagerapple/

      --
      Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
    2. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually, Mac cubes ran many of the displays on the STNG Enterprise set.

  24. The (new) Borg Behind the Scenes? by macguiguru · · Score: 0
    LOL!!!

    That's a RIOT!

    Always liked those displays - Okuda did some truly outstanding work for that show.

  25. Apples EVERYWHERE! by macguiguru · · Score: 0
    LOL!

    I stand (repeatedly) corrected!

    Trust the Trekkies (Trekkers)(Tribbles?) to come through with not just chapter, but verse!

    1. Re:Apples EVERYWHERE! by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1
      LOL! I stand (repeatedly) corrected!

      Actually, you don't. Tuvak served on Voyager, not Enterprise.
      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
  26. GAAAH! I already debunked this crap twice... by Anarchitect · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...both here and here .

    C'mon people - a little Google can take you a long way.

    --
    QA implies some kind of quality to begin with.
  27. gummint agents by bobsalt · · Score: 1

    as long as they have to carry the barbie make up case/toilet seat laptop around....

  28. MacTEENS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MacTEENS? MACTEENS?

    What do they do - dance around singing 'Mamma Mia'?

    Please deliver us from MACTEENS!

  29. They turn eyes, anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am a civilian employee of a National Lab, where I use Macs all the time.

    Occasionally I go to D.C. to attend workshops run by military organizations; these workshops attract about half-and-half civilian contractors and military (both in and out of uniform).

    When I take my iBook, I am guaranteed to spend the first two or three breaks of every working session, giving demonstrations to closet Mac enthusiasts, curious onlookers, and the Windows Walking Wounded.

  30. Re:SCSI on osx is four times more slow than os9 by iMacGuy · · Score: 1

    go back to fyad

    --
    Why won't slashdot let me change my terrible username :(