Slashdot Mirror
New South Wales Traffic Authority Switches to Macs
MacGyver writes ""In what may well be Apple Computer's largest coup in the Australian enterprise space, the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) will deploy 1200 G4 iMacs across 140 registry offices." This isn't just a Mac story: the RTA statement noted, "The Apple rollout is a continuation of RTA usage of open standards-based software and systems. The further adoption of open source is being undertaken to provide more choice of vendors and to guarantee RTA systems are providing value for money."
thats like saying your moving from california to idaho for a better selection of produce.
--Idiots, Every single one of YOU, A flaming mass of conglomerated morons, hey wait a second, isnt that how RAID works?
They decide to switch to "open standards-based software and systems", and decide on Apple, a company which makes Microsoft look like a bastion of openness?
I mean, no offense to Apple fans out there... Apple's niche of success is BUILT on having complete control over their hardware... Wouldn't a Linux or *BSD solution, ultimately, be what they should have gone with?
"If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."
- Seneca
This isn't just a Mac story: The further adoption of open source is being undertaken
:P
The irony here is, there wouldn't be a mac/apple story if it weren't for Apple having gone to OS X and a more open software philosophy. It looks like, were it not for open source, much of the revitalization that Apple has undergone in the wake of OS X would not have occured, and "Apple is dying!" would be all over slashdot - as it as prior to OS X. Haven't seen those trolls for a while, so maybe it's telling.
Of course, now there'll be 15 replies with, "Apple is dying!" or "BSD is dying!" or such, just to spite me.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
My guess why they went for Apple is probably because Darwin is bassed on BSD and the source is available. It may not be open in the sence that Linux is but it is more open then Microsoft ever will be.
Also, with Apple meing a majoe vendor they have a certain sence of security when it coemes to future support. Apple have a better chance of sticking around than some shop making custom Linux boxes
Actually, this is pretty important. Governmental departments are notoriously slow to change. This shows that governments are slowing giving MS/Windows alternatives a chance, which is extremely positive. Sure, they may not have gone with Linux (the fact that Mac OS X runs MS Office natively probably makes it easy for them to transition to the new platform), but this shows that alternative OS's are slowly gaining traction. Furthermore, Australia is very Microsoft-centric. I was surprised by the prevalence of MS technology there. And the fact that an Aussie governmental department would go with Apple highlights that alternative OS's may have a chance after all.
-B
I don't see the value in using 1200 Macintoshes for simple data entry applications which could be accomplished by dumb terminals. Nothing against Apple or the Macintosh, but this is like replacing the Fords and Chevys at the public works with 1200 brand new Mercedes-Benzes.
"Yeah, but who's gonna FLY it, kid?"
Stability is a tricky thing - just like vendor relationships. Apple knows their hardware as well as their software. Whenever I hear the word, "Custom", as it relates to a large project like this, I cringe.
Does 'Custom' mean that you never have to:
- Patch it?
- Update various included software?
- Include new hardware support?
Of course not! Even if you're not paying for the software, you're going to have pay for the support for the software - however you figure it. Just ask IBM - that's their new business model. Think their customers are getting off any cheaper than Apple's? Don't bet on it.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Going with Apple gives them the ability to run OSS software on top of a supported, performant, supported, off the shelf platform. It reduces the risk and is therefore a good thing from a taxpayers point of view.
The cheaper hardware isn't a big deal here either. As a government agency they would have to go with a big supplier, one that's going to be able to supply and support them and has a track record of doing so. When you are dealing with these volumes I would guess that the Apple kit won't come in much more expensive than say Dell or HP etc.
You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
Um HELLO!!!! (I copied that bit off your post)...proprietary computers don't cause lock in....proprietary data formats do. If the data is OS/hardware agnostic, it hardly matters what hardware they use on the desktop.
If using Macs helps with that transition (remember they probably need MS Office) then lucky Apple - they make a sale.
I come from a LAN down under
Where the packets flow and routers chunder
Whilst I like the idea of using Macs, somehow I think that considering the intended use of them, this is an ideal situation in which to deploy x-terms. The article says that they already use Sun gear, so why not roll-out a load of Sunrays? - They'd use less power and last longer because they have no moving parts.
That being said, the Macs are a better choice when compared to PC's... they might be a bit more expensive up front, but the build quality is excellent and people find them easier to use, so the cost of maintaining and supporting them is going to be lower.
One of the interesting things in the article is that they can use the swivel mount to show people their license photos easily. Pretty nifty.
Of course, I have no idea about why they made the decision because I don't work there - I also live across the border in SA.
It should come as no surprise that a lot of posts are in the vein of "they should have used xxx instead of Apple, because Apple is proprietary/expensive/..."
Which shows a lot of people who shout RTFM all day are above RTFA. I think it's pretty cool to see macs deployed in open source situations. Best of two worlds and such...
The funniest posts of course are in the vein of "they should of called my cousin Ned" (translated from "build yourself").
Which shows a lot of people don't know what "Cost" and "Cost of ownership" and associated factors are.
Even with Apple's recent track record, I doubt self-built kits will outlive a bunch of macs without blowing some fuses and minds, but whatever.
I think the appropriate response to Apple and NSW TA would be "Good on ye, mate!"
I think, therefore I am...I think.