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."

41 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. This is EXACTLY what Apple needs... by Chordonblue · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's been a long time since I've heard a story like this that didn't involve a university or some other education-based organization.

    I think Apple can make an excellent case given the rising amount of spyware, viruses, and worms on the PC as well as selling their BSD-based OS.

    Good deal and hooray for competition! It's about time (again).

    --
    "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
    1. Re:This is EXACTLY what Apple needs... by MBCook · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I was thinking about that last night. Remember the commercials that Apple used to run? There would be a guy in an office doing a presentation or something and things would go wrong. People in the audience would start shouting out "Press ctrl-alt-delete" or "c:\(blah)" and on an on. The one guy would stand up and say "Get a Macintosh!".

      Those commercials would be so great right now. Have ones of people getting viruses, or spyware problems, or just the usual PC headaches too. Apple's got a great platform, they need to ADVERTISE it.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  2. Diversity in computing! by JohnMajor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is quite a great achievement for Apple. They currently are doing very well with their advertising campaign and showing off the capabilities of their products. I have been a hard-line OSS user for probably about 5 years and have been very impressed with the new eMac, Powerbook and G5, the new MacOS X too is very refined and well done and I love how the command line utilities are still available(compared to Win). I think all governments should be trying to distribute their computing schemes to several different OS for security purposes alone and should at least not be locked into deals with Microsoft. Linux on the desktop I just don't feel has the simple usability of MacOS X yet so I am very glad too see Apple getting such a large deployment. I am sure their will be more to come as I doubt they will hear many complaints about there G4 iMacs.

    --
    A moratorium around election time to end some of these shenanigans would be appropriate.
  3. 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.
  4. Re:Ummm... by PhyreFox · · Score: 3, Funny
    "Microsoft is the only company you are allowed to bash in here."

    Forgotten about SCO already?

    --
    My words are backed with NUCLEAR WEAPONS!
  5. Re:Ummm... by OmniVector · · Score: 5, Informative

    that would be true if microsoft windows was based on freebsd, but i believe you're mistaken.

    lets take a looksie

    windows has the registry. apple has xml files
    outlook and outlook express use a proprietary database format. apple uses mbox
    windows uses a proprietary network file sharing protocol. apple uses nfs
    windows has a closed kernel. mac uses a freebsd kernel (of which you can download on apple's website).
    microsoft uses it's own proprietary messaging protocol. apple uses oscar (which may not be open, but it's a hell of a lot more used and standard)
    microsoft's browser defaults searches to msn. apple's browser defaults to google.
    microsoft's browser is based on a non-standards compliant closed source engine. apple's is based off the open source khtml library.
    microsoft's compiler and IDE is closed and costs thousands. apple's is free (xcode) and based off an open source compiler (gcc).
    microsoft's backing .net and includes a very crappy jvm implementation. apple uses's sun's official jvm with performance improvements and native widget toolkits in os x, and this is installed by default
    microsoft uses a closed source web server. apple ships os x with an open source webserver, apache.
    microsoft implemented a proprietary api for game development, directx. apple bases their display system (quartz extreme) off opengl, and supports openal now as well.
    x86 machines use proprietary bioses for each motherboard. apple uses openfirmware, developed by sun and ibm i believe.

    i think i've made my point, but believe me, there's more. that sounds a lot more like open-standards based than microsoft.

    --
    - tristan
  6. Kudos to the Apple sales dude... by Lattitude · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ... the G4s will be used as point-of-sale terminals for its counter staff to handle RTA customers transactions across "prepared business applications" as well as for "collecting data and payments and issuing licences, registration certificates and receipts for various transactions"...

    So they are using full blown Macs for a cash register, attaching a laser printer for receipts and certificates and running some specific software. Seems to me a cheaper solution might be found using a dumber device and a web app or two.

  7. 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
  8. 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

  9. 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
  10. 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

  11. 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.

    1. Re:What value? by anothy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      no, it's not.

      the x-term + back-room server model works great if you already have an IT staff on-site for other reasons. but it involves running the server and keeping the terminal hardware up. again, x-terms are great. i've admin'd sites with that model, and it's wonderful to be able to just replace the whole unit and have to do near-zero config when one breaks. but they do break. on our floor of ~30 NCD x-terms, we swapped out about one a month.
      note, also, that x-terms aren't as cheap as you'd think - i'm constantly surprised by how expensive they are, actually. that is, if you're buying from a reputable vendor, but the dirt cheap ones usually have a corresponding increase in problems.

      i've done the x-term thing, and i've admin'd mac networks. for about 90% of the applications, the later has better cost factors. not to mention usability factors. remember that the most expensive thing in this question is almost always human time.
      oh, and i've also admin'd large Win32-based networks. that makes sense about 0% of the time.

      --

      i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
  12. Re:Providing more vendor options? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    More software purchasing options, dumb-ass.

    Since Macs run just about everything people use Windows for (Office, E-mail, calendars, accounting, etc.), and can run almost all *nix software, they are the #1 platform for variety of software choice. There isn't even room for debate.

  13. Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Cool!

    That means I get to listen to iTunes next time I go to fail my license exam.

  14. 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..."
  15. NuBus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    NuBus was created by TI.

    And it was used in more than just Macs.

    Honestly, when Apple selected NuBus, they had no real choice.

    There were two other major busses available at the time.

    One was VME Bus (used by Sun, amongst others). This was in wide use, but card support was strange, selecting drivers was often difficult. Also, you had to remove jumpers when you put in a card and put them back if you ever took it out. As an aside, VME Bus was "unfair", giving priority to some cards over others. This was not a big deal, although it was made out to be at the time.

    The other was IBM's AT-bus (later ISA). This was incredibly slow and it was tied closely to the architecture of the Intel 80x86. Trying to make it work on a Motorola processor would have been difficult, and even if done perfectly would have produce very slow throughput since AT-Bus was only 16-bits wide. And, as we all know, installing more than one AT-Bus card at one time was incredibly dicey, requiring lots of jumper settings.

    In short, Apple chose the only alternative they could have to accomplish their goals.

    As to ADB, well, they could have used the PC keyboard connector (PS/2 wasn't available or in wide use at the time). It wasn't well suited to international keyboards (as you couldn't detect what keyboard was attached very well) and Apple wanted international support. It was key to gaining the desktop publishing market, which they did very well.

    ADB also allowed the mouse to be plugged into the keyboard (reduced connectors) and allowed the machine to be turned on from the keyboard, which was nice.

    All in all, I think your complaints are misguided. The technologies you speak of actually show less protectionism than the issues of the motherboard ROMs at the time.

    As to Microsoft not working with competitors' hardware, Microsoft doesn't sell hardware. Well, usually they don't, and when they do it, they do it poorly (witness their current failed attempt to enter the 802.11 market). Anyway, there were 3rd party solutions to make 3rd party CD drives work. I don't get what the big deal is.

  16. Re:Ummm... by dysprosia · · Score: 3, Informative

    No, Mac OS X's kernel isn't Mach, it's XNU. Mac OS X's core operating system is called Darwin, which has a lot (but not all) of it open source.

    "NextOS" doesn't exist, but Mac OS X is somewhat derived from OPENSTEP, from NeXT.

  17. 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

  18. 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.
  19. There is a precedent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Another state police force in Australia already use Macs as their base machine. That is in Queensland (QLD).

    Or at least they were in the 1990s. I'm a bit out of date on my Mac info.

  20. 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.
  21. 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

  22. 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.

    1. Re:Good, yet bad. by reverbca · · Score: 5, Informative

      As I posted further down, we chose iMacs firstly because of the screen. Operators can just put it where they want it, which made OH&S happy due to reduced possibility of future lawsuits, etc. from people who have been squinting and cheapy monitors on weird angles.

      The fact that they are a UNIX-based system by default is great, and after the hardware was all but decided on there was some talk of running Linux on them, but that never eventuated.

      We tried Sunrays, but they didn't suit what we wanted to do. We looked pretty seriously at them, since we are replacing Javastations in this rollout (generation before Sunrays), but the didn't do everything we wanted.

  23. 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.
  24. Re:Providing more vendor options? by daquake · · Score: 5, Funny

    Reminds me of when at a tech meeting I stated I was an Apple Certified Technician, I was asked what the hell I do, help people color coordinate their mac purchases?

    --
    Be True, Unbeliever
  25. Re:Ummm... by falcon5768 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Apple....

    We know it will work cause we make sure vedors who make anything made for our systems will make sure it works

    Linux on a x86 platform

    Well we will make drivers eventually.... anyday now.... we swear..... what its been 3 months? well we have a new product that IS compatable, you need to upgrade though....

    Given the choice of open software on a platfore your almost assured will work, or a platform you need to juryrig to work... I would take Apple

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  26. Sunrays have another cool feature by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When used with the smartcard readers they feature, you can take your session with you. So you are working, need to go somewhere else, just pull the card and go. When you insert it into another system, your session will be there, just as you left it.

    I'm a real fan, provided you aren't using intense applications. If your stuff does a lot of graphics, you'll quickly find that the CPU and memory it requires makes the servers more expensive than just getting dedicated computers. However for centralized data entry (as they'll be doing) Sunrays rock.

  27. Re:This isn't just an apple story? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm faily certain this guy is a troll, but I'l bite.

    So, what is it then exactly about the current breed of MacOS that locks a person in? People don't tend to be terribly concerned about /hardware/ lockin - they're concerned about software.

    Name one thing about apple software that currently locks a person into MacOS. I'm genuinely interested. Look here if you have any doubt that apple is, indeed, embracing a more open approach.

    In all honesty, I'd wager that you're likely to have better "hardware portability" with PPC stuff and macs in general in the future than with x86, due to the fact that there are many fewer variants of macs compared to PCs, and there seem to be a lot more shitty components that lack multiplatform support on PC (winmodems, nforce chipsets, and what have you).

    So basically: it's wintel monoculture vs. everything else, discount or no. "choice of vendors" makes perfect sense, as when there's a monopoly with over 90% market share (hint: it's microsoft), everything else -is- a choice, if it works.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  28. 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.
  29. Re:Ummm... by 1u3hr · · Score: 5, Informative
    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?

    If you'd RTFA, you'd know that the "open standards" referred to are Java and Unix, which OSX interoperates with much better than Windows, which (apparently) was used previously. The iMacs run a Java virtual terminal and Mozilla browsers. Is that open enough?

  30. Re:hmmm by MisterQ · · Score: 4, Informative

    What I find incredibly amusing, is the fact that a similar size loss has occurred to Apple in a nearby area. Optus Communications, Australias second largest telco, has been a MAC Shop since it started, but is slowly changing away. And slowly is the operative word, as it has been found that the "amount of hardware" and inherent cost has increased dramatically in the Wintel world...

    Probably because it has outsourced it's IT to Compaq, and then HP (With IBM GSA Doing application design in the wings) disentangling the incumbent MAC components has been a nightmare for them, predominantly because of hardware vendors more focused on selling new widgets than working out what flavour of widgets the customer required.

    But then, this is the same company that has a Billing System that runs just fine on VAXes, that they haven't been able to "beat" with applications runing on Sun E10000's and HP Superdomes...

  31. Re:Ummm... by OmniVector · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apple includes proprietary Mac OS X only programs for everything: music, photo, movies, DVD player, email, contacts, and office programs.
    then use xmms, gimp, mplayer, avidemux, evolution, and openoffice. there's not much stopping you with fink/darwinports and x11. there are plenty of native mac equivalents to those. the difference though is these programs are all included in the cost of the OS ($129). this is not so bad a deal considering all you get.

    Apple makes sure that everything that goes into their computers has their logo and their stamp of a aproval on it. They insure that you cannot purchase components directly from the supplier so that they make as much money as possible, another great way to support open standards.
    this is far more a problem with the industry than it is apple. if there were several cpu manufacturers, several mobo manufacturers, etc, then economies of scale would allow you to build a ppc os x compatible machine. don't complain to apple for this, complain to the hardware companies for not offering more solutions.

    Their OS while based on Unix can only be installed on Mac hardware while its base suggests that it could be run on X86 machines and other formfactors becides their own.
    windows can only be installed on x86. why can't i install it on ppc? that sure is vendor lock in! don't give me that crap. apple doesn't make money off it's OS. it makes money off it's hardware. if you want os x for intel, keep dreaming. if it wasn't made for ppc only, apple would probably go out of business.

    And just as MS pushes MSN and .net, Apple pushes Apple.com and .mac accounts.
    um, those have nothing to do with each other. .NET is a programming api. that buzzword is used for many other things, but that is what i was talking about. not .mac. if you don't like .mac, don't use .mac. however for .NET, the programming api, it's pure microsoft platform lock-in using system.windows.forms, which is heavily windows-only. unlike java.

    If anything, it is Apple that is the worst infraction to open standards computing, since they make sure that their standards are open only to other mac users. In essence, Appe takes from the open source community, mutates its function and intent, and then spits it back out with a high price and fruity colors. Going Apple is okay if thats your thing, but heralding their openness is like saying you purchased Windows for the stability
    so would you rather apple implement a proprietary closed standard for EVERY SINGLE THING they do? i know a company who does this.. they are called microsoft. go look up your history books sometime. the fact that apple leverages open source is an ADVANTAGE. it means they spend less time concentrating on OS security bugs, and more time producing great software using the power of all this open source. if you don't like the fact that it costs more, then don't buy it. if you don't like the fact that it looks better than windows (because aqua does) then quit bitching and apply a theme (go to uninsanity's website). yes, i AM hearlding their openness. because they are 100 times more open than the most proprietary, monopolistic company, on the planet.

    --
    - tristan
  32. Re:WHAT? by MacDaffy · · Score: 4, Informative

    I touched my first Macintosh in December of 1987 because my best friend said it would be better if my resume were presented as a Macintosh document. From a cold start to finished product (including figuring out how to print: 20 minutes). That resume got me a job as a contractor at Apple. I stayed there for the most part of the next fourteen years.

    The projects I worked on: Communications Toolbox, AppleShare 2.0, AppleShare PC, AppleShare IP, PC Exchange, Copland, MacTerminal, quality lead for the Scriptable Finder, iTools (later .Mac), AirPort, LC II Apple II emulator, HyperCard Audio Help, every Mac OS from 6 through X, every machine up to the original iMac (I was laid off in 1997), and every machine from the 1999 crop to the domed iMac in 2001. I now make my living as a Mac and Windows consultant on the big island of Hawaii. I've owned (or own) a PowerBook Duo 250, PowerBook 5300, iBook (dual USB) and a Sawtooth G4. I, too, know the machines, the software and a lot of the people who made them. Been there, done that and still own a shitload of t-shirts.

    I could go on for a while, but suffice it to say that I know Macs.

    With all I know, I will always purchase new Apple hardware. I'm recommending Apple hardware to everyone for whom it is appropriate.

    I can rebuild a Mac from parts I buy at WalMart (monitors, CD and DVD drives, external Zip drives, speakers, mice, keyboards, hard drives, routers (wired and wireless), USB and FireWire cards in both PCI and PCMCIA flavors), RadioShack (memory, USB keyboards, mice and hubs) or Office Depot (miscellaneous). As long as the equipment is up to spec, I don't worry about compatibility.

    Apple isn't perfect. It has its quirks. But I fix more Macs more quickly with less hassle than just about any Windows shitbox you could put in front of me. And they stay fixed.

    End of story.

  33. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    I would be tempted to believe you if Apple was not so Mac centric. While they may support open source on the inside, the marketing strategies and consumer appeal are anything but.

    This is like saying, "I would be tempted to believe you if Linux wasn't so GNU-centric. Mac=Apple=Mac. I don't see your point.

    Apple includes proprietary Mac OS X only programs for everything: music, photo, movies, DVD player, email, contacts, and office programs.

    iTunes isn't Mac OS X only. And Apple doesn't make an Office program. And they can't legally open their DVD player either. Get your facts straight.

    Apple makes sure that everything that goes into their computers has their logo and their stamp of a aproval on it. They insure that you cannot purchase components directly from the supplier so that they make as much money as possible, another great way to support open standards.

    Yes, that's the problem with Windows and Linux. Nothing is really guaranteed to work. It's always plug and pray. Actually, only the outside of a Mac has the logo on it. And my mouse, keyboard, hard drive, monitor, speakers, RAM, and several other parts can all bought from third-party vendors. So much for your weird closed standards notion of Apple. Thinking back to the Mac Plus days were we?

    Their OS while based on Unix can only be installed on Mac hardware while its base suggests that it could be run on X86 machines and other formfactors becides their own.

    Er, wrong again. DarwinBSD (which is the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X) can be installed on x86 architecture.

    And just as MS pushes MSN and .net, Apple pushes Apple.com and .mac accounts.

    Apple doesn't have apple.com accounts. And, no, they're not pushy about .mac accounts. I think you're getting confused with Microsoft Passport and Linux's Wallet program, which is the most annoying pushy feature I've seen yet in an OS. Mac OS X has NEVER popped up a dialog about .Mac

    If anything, it is Apple that is the worst infraction to open standards computing, since they make sure that their standards are open only to other mac users. In essence, Appe takes from the open source community, mutates its function and intent, and then spits it back out with a high price and fruity colors. Going Apple is okay if thats your thing, but heralding their openness is like saying you purchased Windows for the stability.

    Now this is where you really show your true colors, TROLL. If Apple hadn't embraced BSD, they would be nowhere as big as they are now. Apple embraced BSD when they didn't have to, and they lost 2 good years trying to get going on top of that crappy operating system (2000 and 2001). Apple is one of the few real success stories of open source, but you're all too ready to point the finger. It looks like you're too confused about this whole "sharing" thing to tell your friends from your enemies. Anyone who decides to give their work away for free and then DEMAND that people use it exactly as they wish is a FOOL. Giving things away is a risk you take for a greater good. You shouldn't be advocating open standards when you don't know why or what they're for, you hypocrite

  34. Re:What about the roads? by ztwilight · · Score: 3, Funny
    They could have used the money to fix 1200 potholes in Sydney roads, you can swim in some of them when it rains!

    Yeah, but now you can have Macs and go swimming too! Yahoo!

    --
    Who moved my sig?
  35. As one of the decision makers on this... by reverbca · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... let me say that the story doesn't do the project great justice.

    The main reason for choosing iMacs over a Linux/BSD/whatever solution (which we did try side by side with plenty of others) was OH&S.

    Yes, Occupational Health and Safety. They took one look at the screen design, the way each individual user could move the screen where they wanted it and they were pretty much sold. We approached another supplier for a similar solution, only to get a quote for a movable screen of equivalent specs that put it about AUD $1000 over the price of the iMacs.

    We were keen to Switch to Macs from our Javastations because they make a great product, they are supported by a "big" name (the rest of our our system is Solaris), and we can perform remote admin and stuff easily.

    Other big-name suppliers were pushing to get in on this but someone with the authority to make such decisions said "no Windows in registries" after Blaster/Slammer/et al took out most of the rest of the organisation while our Javastations kept on kicking on.

    As with any public-facing organisation, the amount of customers we would have had to say "sorry you've waited half an hour already, please come back tomorrow, assuming we've fixed it by then" to if our registry network was taken out would have made for a bigger news story than this one by far.

    On another note, the press release that seems to have made it out mixes two different things we are doing - changing to the iMacs here, which running our custom Java app (plus Mozilla and a few other bits and pieces), and investigating open-source as a general concept. There's plenty of OS there all throughout the registry network, but the corporate desktops are all still Win2k/Office/Exchange/Novell jobbies, the replacement of which is being investigated with closed and open solutions from varying vendors.

  36. MOD THIS UP by Evil+Pete · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nothing like inside information to set all the wild theorising in slashdot to rest. Oh yeah. Slashdot. Sorry, continue the wild speculations!

    --
    Bitter and proud of it.
  37. 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.
  38. Re:As one of the people who helped with the bid ;) by rmlane · · Score: 5, Informative
    And as one of the guys who did a little work on the Apple bid I can confirm that the info posted by reverbca is accurate, and could have could have come from from someone within the RTA. The details of their internal IT are correct, anyway, as are the reasons Apple got the deal.

    Another reason the iMac's moveable screen was such a hit was that it allows the RTA staffmember to show the customer an image of their licence photo before the licence is printed, which happens at the registry. (New South Wales driving licences are pinted on demand on a plastic card the same size and thickness as a credit card, and include a passport style picture. A transparent holographic image is then laminated on top to make them harder to forge.)

    But if YOU were given a spec that looked like this: Replace our EOL'ed Javastations, must have

    LCD screen on movable arm

    fast, reliable Java implementation

    strongly prefer UNIX

    can't be Windows

    Easy integration with head office wintel software a bonus

    Would you pick anything but an iMac?