Slashdot Mirror
Australia's 'e-tax' Windows Only
Kinky Bass Junk writes "As the need to submit tax returns is looming, notification emails are sent out to users of the tax office's services. This year, the Australia Tax Office (ATO) is using a web-based tax return system, as well as the traditional paper based systems. The e-tax website has all the details, and the requirements of the software stand out: 'e-tax is not compatible with Linux or Apple Macintosh computers. However, if you have suitable Windows Emulator software installed, you may be able to use e-tax.' Here is a protest email I have set up for those who disagree with this."
for keeping the US economy strong. It's nice to know that when anyone pays a tax in Austrailia, they also pay a tax to Redmond to keep our economy here alive.
The "educated minority"? Gee anyone who uses Windows is uneducated. Great. What a way to get your word out.
Perhaps you should take your "minority" and realize that the government is trying to do its best to serve the "majority". Make more sense to me, likely a better use of taxpayer money. Personally I use OS-9? Can you please support that too?
Come on.
They don't say that it will never become available to Linux and Mac users, simply that it's only out for Windows right now. Think about it for a minute. You only have time to get a single version of the client ready so which OS do you support first? You could release a Linux or Mac client and reach a fraction of your users or a Windows client and reach a large majority. Hmmm, let's see...
Besides, it doesn't sound like the emulation is that tough. Getting Wine working on Linux with simple applications certainly isn't difficult, this coming from a Linux "n00b". I don't know for certain, but I'd imagine that a tax return application would emulate easily enough.
Give them a break and stop whining. Not to tout Windows or bash Linux, but this is what happens when you've chosen to use an operating system with a very small consumer market share. Give it time.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
Considering most people use Windows it makes sense to initially develop a program for Windows. It's a responsible use of tax money. How about the Linux community builds their own open source version? I'm sure it would easily be ported to OS X.
I mean, it would be more disturbing if they only had a version for Be OS, right?
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
This is not actually a surprise to me. A lot of programs like this are made for windows, more than likely because of it's popularity(sad as it is, I know).
No one said that there will never be a linux or mac port but I wouldn't be betting on it in the near future either, although I don't know how linux is doing in Austrailia.
In the end it's all about popularity and until we can start converting friends and family over to the light side of the force(ie. linux) this is the sort of thing we will have to get used to (Or create our own ports).
The requirements: http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.asp?doc= /content/32613.htm&page=3&H3
Why in the world do Governments want to be dependent on a foreign company's closed-source proprietary software is beyond me.
I understand the need to get the most common platform but supercomplex software projects like Firefox can manage Mac/Linux/Windows (through QT???) - why can't a government?
It will save them headaches in the long-run, if the code is written to be portable and platform independent.
I get into the same mood when I see a website warning me it's only configured for IE or Active X. What is that BS?
No server programmer in their right mind would trust the client to do validation and use the data it supplies blindly. The server should be validating submitted forms and rejecting those that don't add up; then it doesn't matter what client people use. (For that matter, it's just a *form*; why not use plain HTML forms and work on every browser?) If the security of their tax system depends on their client-side validation, rest assured that there will be modified versions of the software floating around which conveniently omit a few things here and there, whether or not the source is available.
The government doesn't need to write a client for every possible OS, particularly ones that are (for the moment) used by a minority of users. They just need to provide all the information for anyone else to be able to. Releasing the source to their client is one way to do that; another would be a full specification of the protocol. If Australia has a FOIA equivalent, use it to demand the protocol specification.
"My toaster is broken, it can't cook pizza!". GNU/Linux isn't designed to run Windows programs. The fact that one particular program running on it can passably do so using emulation is an interesting novelty that benefits some people while transitioning away from the programs in question. It is a stopgap, not a good long-term solution.
The government's goal is not to convert people to Linux/Mac/OSS, or even to support that minority. Their goal is to cut down on massive amounts of paperwork and make it easier for most people to pay their taxes. The quickest and cheapest way to do that is by releasing a Windows program to pay taxes, duh. Someone even suggested taking this matter to the courts, comparing it to handicapped/women's rights.
"Your honor, I don't want to use Windows because it sucks and MS is evil, and I don't want to use the traditional paper system because I'm an elitist computer-literate citizen. Therefore, the government should be required to release a Mac/Linux version of the tax software." The response would be: Tough luck, use paper. You're lucky to have a computerized system to begin with.
Here are some things to remember:
-William Brendel
But surely you could see many programmers hiding little bugs within the program to make themselves tax free. Not everything must or can be open source.
I see your point, but if it's possible to cheat on your taxes by modifying the client software, then it's a pretty weak design. All such checks should be done on the server side. Even though the program is being distributed as a binary, if such loopholes exist, one can imagine some hex-editor-wielding taxpayer giving himself tax breaks. I see no reason why the whole design couldn't be made secure against this or why they couldn't provide a web-based system so that all you need is a browser.
Its is the open source community's resposibility to make it's OS compatible with these processes, not the company/government to make a version for your OS.
It's pretty difficult to make your OS run binaries from another platform if the other platform is closed source. The government shouldn't have to build a version of the program for every OS, but it should provide an interface compatible with some open standard/protocol, such as HTTP. This way, even if your platform didn't support the standard/protocol, it would be easy for someone to write a program that did.
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this theorem that this sig is too small to contain.
the educated minority of the Internet world often choose to use alternative operating systems,
"The sort of thing not to say when protesting 101"
This is not a dream, not a dream...we are transmitting from the year 1-9-9-9.
Yah!! Someone finally made the Free Software argument. Jesus we're slow these days. How can a government ever justify not releasing source code to the public? It's developed with public funds, therefore we own it. It's not made for profit, therefore there's no economic case for keeping it secret. For all we know there could be glaring bugs in this software (there was in the version that came out last year) and we'll be unable to fix them before submitting a tax return (meaning we'll be responsible for them). I recommended in another post that we use the Freedom Of Information Act to get the source code. I wonder what loophole there is in the law that would prevent us from doing that. I'm sure there is one. Of course, there's also the distinct possibility that the government didn't even get the source code to this software from the contractors they paid to make it.
How we know is more important than what we know.
is you all have a problem with software that runs on the os of the majority of desktop users? I can understand being mad if it's forcably denying someone non-windows when it works on non-windows, but it doesn't. They picked a piece of software that fits their needs(and probably for a fairly cheap price overall), and you're upset that the makers didn't make a copy for niche operating systems? Oh well, this really leaves you with 3 options: 1) Bitch and moan in the hope that they'll inconvinence the vast majority of the people by forcing a switch to new software, after people have gotten used to this software 2) Create your own open source copy, since isn't that what the whole "movement" is good at, taking other peoples ideas and remaking them? or 3) Just filing your fucking forms in paper.
I want you to assume that all spelling and grammar errors are intentional. Thank You.
Because at the moment they provide guarantees and protection when you use the application to submit your taxes.
If they opened the source and allowed non official clients to connect to the service, they could no longer provide those guarantees or protections.
Also, I don't think too many people would be happy trusting their TFN to anything but software provided by the ATO.
Also, the etax software has _never_ been anything but windows only, I don't know why suddenly that's a big problem - or any more of a problem than it was in 1998.
Advanced users are users too!
I've submitted my last two tax returns using e-tax, and havn't had a problem with booting into windows.
Billions of dollars will change hands based on the data entered into e-tax. Extremely strict testing is needed, and supporting multiple platforms would make this all the more difficult.
Given that
a) Non-windows platforms make up only a few percent of the market; and
b) Most non-windows platforms can successfully emulate windows well enough to run e-tax (Although I wouldn't risk the potential for errors)
c) You are still able to use the standard paper based submission, or an accountant (And your probably much better off using an accountant).
I can understand the decision to only support windows.
you guys are outraged because they put out something that only works on windows? a lot of software companies put out software that is windows only. they are satisifed to hit the majority in one swoop. you can still file taxes using traditional forms. democracy doesn't mean that every single person gets their way. i understand your argument of "to do it right, they could have easily....". do you guys seriously expect the govt to always do things right? how about ever? i think there are much larger issues to check the govt on...
Why don't they just use a web-browser system for doing taxes? There are many companies in Canada (and presumably the US) that use a browser-based package to allow people to file their returns.
;P
I used one myself this year and it was painless and fast. No need for software for specific clients/OSes.
(didn't RTFA, apologies if I missed something)
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
How can a government ever justify not releasing source code to the public? It's developed with public funds, therefore we own it.
... I'll have to use that argument to get into Area 51 to take a ride in whatever cool aircraft they've got there. :)
Hmm
"Don't point that weapon at me, young man; I'll have you know I pay your salary!"
I would very much like to suggest that those who want to participate in the protest rewrite the mail to a more mellow non biased tone - remember what you want is not blod or infuriation but a change of heart. Coming across as a *MS basher is not the way to go about it. If you want your message to come across you need to explain about the greatness of open standards - how for example the norwegian government has banned the use of closed proprietary standards from 2006 if I remember correctly and make the people understand that if they make a W3C compliant web interface future development cost are put onto the browser software developers who must make sure they follow the guidelines set out by W3C. Also point out that by creating an interface following W3C guidelines and not being operating system or browser specific they'll create a competetive innovative environment where free market forces can thrive. Politicians love that stuff.
Then send your friendly toned message to your legislators - furthermore by wording your protests individually you will force them to read each mail instead of simply sorting them and making a computerized count... if they even bother to go that far.
Do you honestly think that the fact that you CHOSE to use another OS comes under the same banner as growing up as a woman or being handicapped? And that your struggle for cross-platform support is on a par with the struggle for women's rights all over the world?
I think "Get over yourself" is the phrase that comes to mind.
I know im going to get modded as a Troll for this *sigh*
But seriously, why does anyone care, im for cross platform software as much as anyone. And I can see the relevance of this issue if we were dealing with a common day usage piece of software, but we are talking about a tax system that gets used once a year.
I understand the governments position in the issue, that by providing for windows they are providing for the larger portion of citizens with computers, whether we like it or not.
Im sure with some more time in development the system could be written or ported to other operating systems, but I ask is this really necessary?
In Australia you can easily lodge you tax information on paper in about the same amount of time. And if you wish to use e-tax then it is a matter of dropping into your relative's house for a use of their windows based machine.
I know all of this seems a long winded excuse for not having cross platform support, but for a little used program that because of this choice already supports most of the population is such cross platform support a necessity or are we protecting for comfort.
I hardly think that more tax payers money needs to be spent employing people to port the program, and please don't scream community development because I defiantly wouldn't like my tax information to be lodged using a program ported by the community, no matter the quality. I'm sure that almost 100% of people wishing to use e-tax could find some access to a Windows platform once a year.
What is done, is done. It's not the optimal approach and the point of this post is to seek a better environment for cross platform users, but I simply believe that program aesthetics aside, what we have is all we need; anything more is what we want.
If it's anything like what happened with the official UK lottery site (which banned almost all non-IE *and* non-Windows users from its online games until earlier this year), it'll take about 3 years before the Aussies bother to do another site redesign cycle and suddenly realise what a snafu they originally made.
How can a government be expected to get it right, if no one provides feedback?
Moreover, how can governments be expected to frame fair policies for e-gov applications in general, unless they get feedback from early pilot schemes from this. I wouldn't criticise anyone who wanted to explore technical solutions, but petitioning the government is a useful thing to do in addition to any technical initiative.
As for the specifics
Maybe we could start a letter writing campaign, that might help.
Of course, every one of these involves some kind of work and doesn't have the quick fix appeal of sending an email to a public servant who is just trying to do his job.
I wouldn't have thought that organising a letter writing campaign was necessarily the low work option, myself.
As for the public servant, handling emails is part pf his job.
Really, the only people with any motivation to complain about this are those at Microsoft who fear the erosion of their stranglehold on home computing.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Of course, they wouldn't need to port the program if they made it truly web-based in the first place.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
Congratulations, you have successfully formed an analogy comparing users of Linux, to the physically disabled.
Not too far off in some respects, both literally, and certainly metaphorically, but there are laws in place in most Western nations mandating that Government services be available to people with physical handicaps, whereas there is no such requirement that they be accessible to Linux users.
Here are some things to remember:
My point being, they could/should have developed this as cross platform from the beginning. How hard is it to use open standards to create a cross platform web app? And for the last point, apparently it's been 4 years, how much time does it take to fix this sort of thing?
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
In Holland this is already no longer true for firms, even one person firms. Electronic submittal is mandatory.
It's web + pdf based though so it's mostly OS agnostic.
Anyone who generalizes about slashdotters is a typical slashdotter.
It's important because it forces an extra fixed cost (a 'tax' if you will) to everyone who might want to access it.
The driving factor of using an online tax system is that it saves the cost of having to go through an accountant and/or the time required to post a physical letter (let alone actually pick up the tax forms from somewhere, which seems to change every year).
This route is closed to those not already using a platform based on a convicted illegal monopoly (well, in other places, Australia seems to have no such laws, or refuses to enforce them).
_
\\/ are accustomed' - First Lensman
You aren't allowed access to many government facilities (esp. military) because of the extreme risk of harm to the greater populace, either through access to dangerous resources (a tank) or information (that could be harmful to millions).
Seeing the source code to an application that serves a tax-filing purpose makes sense because there is, or at least should be, no inherent risk in releasing it. Hacking the protocols would be pointless because the client program, if hacked, could not achieve more access to the service than someone could do using a homebrew client program.
Unless, of course, the government has released software on the client or server side which is inherently not secure, in which case they shouldn't be using this anyway (which is probably the case).
If it's truly web-based, then yes, it should work with Lynx.
SWT and RCP are good choices for a cross platform app.
As to cross-platform/cross browser web apps. I've generally found that if you stick to XHTML 1.0 Strict, CSS 1.0, and the DOM 1 core object model for Javascript the web apps I've written just work cross browser 90% of the time, and the 10% of problem is the non-standard behavior of IE that I was going to have a problem with whether I supported the other browsers or not. Or at least that's been my experience doing aggressively cross browser web dev. Oh, and also avoid using tables for layout of non-tabular things. Frankly, what makes cross-browser dev hard is IE. If you live clean (ie standards complaint) your pages will just work in KHTML/Mozilla/Opera out of the box, but about 50% of your time will be spent trying to produce something to work around IEs bugs.