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."

17 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. 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.
  2. 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
  3. 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.

  4. 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

  5. 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
  6. 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

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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

  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. 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.

  12. 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
  13. 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."

  14. 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?

  15. 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.

  16. 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?