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."

15 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Ummm... by CoolMoDee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they do control the hardware, but all the parts in there are standard peices of hardware. It isn't so much the hardware that they are worried about, it is the software. OS X is pretty damn nice to open-standards and the hardware is nice. They still can go with a linux/bsd solution, such at a time when the latest Mac OS won't run on the machines properly they can load up Linux etc.

    --
    Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.
  2. funny. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This isn't just a Mac story: The further adoption of open source is being undertaken

    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. :P

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  3. the 'openness" of Apple by bartron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  4. Re:Ummm... by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's all old Apple stuff. The new Macs use standard memory, IDE drives, USB keyboards and mice. They've bellied up to the Wintel hardware base, just like Sun has.

    You're right about most of your other points, but don't hold the ancient history of deliberately closed hardware at Apple against them in this day and age.

    --
    resigned
  5. Re:Who the fuck cares? by phatsharpie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  6. What value? by dafoomie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  7. As Han Solo once said... by Chordonblue · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "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..."
  8. Re:Ummm... by Rockin'+Az · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Kid - computers are not about hardware. They are not about software. They are about data. If switching to Apple helps them ensure their data is cross platform, then they are getting all the openness they need.

    If their data is cross-platform, then it doesn't matter if they are using Macs, Linux or glorified iPods..they are not "locked in" to a particular vendor.

    So why choose Macs? Maybe for them it was a lower TOC. Maybe for them it is easier to get a locked down system for iMacs. Maybe they just want their offices to look nicer? Who knows..maybe the question was answered in the article...

    --

    I come from a LAN down under

    Where the packets flow and routers chunder

  9. Re:If they really wanted value... by MrMickS · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The majority of government projects have custom code in them. This usually leads to massive cost overruns as the vendors bidding for the project tend to err on the low side of the estimate (or flat out lie) in order to win the tender.

    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.
  10. Re:Providing more vendor options? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Desktop Solaris provides a Unix based OS and supports the majority of Open Source software. And Sparc desktops aren't really any more expensive than G4 desktops.

    Yes, but what other computer can double as a lamp? :)
    While OS X is not as open as, say, Linux, it is more open than Windows. Unlike other options like Solaris, it can play nice in Windows environments, and most of the time can read Windows formats. While Linux can do this, it takes more work to get Linux to do this. Since these machines are destined for decentralized offices, ease of use is probably a must.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  11. Re:WHAT? by Rockin'+Az · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I've already said this earlier in the thread...but...

    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

  12. Good, yet bad. by shplorb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  13. Re:Ummm... by crackshoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't say cheaper. You have to hire people to put the systems together, image the drives, maintain the computers (oh, shit. no warrantee), the nerd you'd need to configure linux or BSD in an enterprise solution.... That sounds like both less effective and, in the long run, more expensive.

    --
    Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
  14. Re:Ummm... by crackshoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Off the shelf does have individual warranties, but not for the unit as a whole. YOu want to add the beurocracy of dealing with even more companies to a government department? Increased time spent getting shit fixed is money - someone has to deal with it.And those support agreements are available - i never denied they were - but thats an added cost over the hardware (and assuming the software is free). Macs also tend to preserve their value for signifigantly longer than x86 boxen. iMacs have lower profile/cost of most available boxes, have an ergonomic LCD, etc. You save space, blah blah blah. If you're going to come up with conclusions, at least give us the benefit of making up some numbers.

    --
    Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
  15. Re:Providing more vendor options? by bursch-X · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Not in numbers, but where else can you get

    more or less all of the big commercial software

    lots of high quality shareware & freeware

    most of the open source software with a recompile or via fink

    a Unix that even your grandmother can use

    not on Windows, not on Linux

    I can run Microsoft office, while browsing the web using Lynx in a Terminal Window, use Adobe's great software and also run KDE, KOffice (betas recompiled using the native QT port now even run natively and don't require X11) and all the other goodies (btw even MPlayer is better on OS X http://mplayerosx.sf.net)

    --
    There are two rules for success:
    1. Never tell everything you know.