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."

Comments

Thank you foreign governments....

[ron_ivi]

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.

Overreaction

[wbren]

As soon as this news item was posted on slashdot, people began bashing the Australian government for only supporting Windows (or writing "protest emails" like the submitter did). It was as if they were saying, "How dare they insult us Linux/Mac users? They are supporting evil Microsoft and alienating all us geeks." They made it Windows-only because they looked at the numbers, plain and simple. Windows is what the vast majority of taxpayers find easiest to use, because it's what they are used to. Most taxpayers use Windows. It is more popular than Linux/MacOS. Before I continue, I fully realize this comment will be modded into the depths of Hell.

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:

• Just because eTax is Windows-only doesn't mean Australia is waging a war on Linux/Mac. It doesn't mean they are "supporting global monopolies". They are casting the widest net with the least cost, which unfortunately is something government rarely attempts.
• The government has better things to do than cater to everyone who uses an OS 90% of people don't use. Sorry, there are much more important things out there.
• They didn't rule out support for other operating systems in the future. They even suggested alternatives for now (Wine, etc).
• It's better to release a test version on one OS than maintain three test versions for three different operating systems. Give them time.

Re:Overreaction

[samtihen]

Ok. I'm not an OS Zealot. I currently use Windows XP on my personal computer.

I disagree with the idea of making something "Windows only" when it is in no way necessary. Equivalent applications could be written in Java, or (preferably) could be completely web based.

Both of these options would work for all users. Neither of these options would be more expensive.

What happened is very simple. The government hired a company that poorly engineered their software.

You are right, it probably doesn't matter to 90% of the people. But don't pretend it would have been harder or more expensive to do it right and have it work for 100% of people.

Explain to me why you would want a government to artificially limit the usability of something as important as Tax Software.

Re:The protest

[HD Webdev]

the educated minority of the Internet world often choose to use alternative operating systems,

"The sort of thing not to say when protesting 101"

Re:That's not OK?

[thorkummer]

Considering most people use Windows it makes sense to initially develop a program for Windows

Web sites, particularly government web sites, should be written to conform to open web standards, not to the idiosyncracies of particular any particular browser.

Re:Give us the source

[mabinogi]

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.

This isn't new

[SlightOverdose]

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.

Re:That's not OK?

[arcade]

Bullshit. It does not make sense to develop it for windows only. In Norway we've got a web based system which are pretty standard-compatible - and thus compatible with most browsers.

Heck, even our new "Bank-ID" system, a common system to identify yourself to all the banks, are standards-based. It requires a web browser with a Java-plugin, and that's it.

Develop for a standard first, and you won't have stupid restrictions later on. Developing for 'one platform first' is nothing but pure stupidity.

Re:Give us the source

[Tumbleweed]

How can a government ever justify not releasing source code to the public? It's developed with public funds, therefore we own it.

Hmm ... I'll have to use that argument to get into Area 51 to take a ride in whatever cool aircraft they've got there. :)

"Don't point that weapon at me, young man; I'll have you know I pay your salary!"

Re:It's easy to make code portable through QT.....

[natrius]

1. Firefox uses its own cross-platform toolkit, XUL, not Qt.
   
2. Using Qt would make them have to pay for licenses or GPL their program. Since it's not GPL'd already, I assume they have a good reason for doing so. That assumption is most likely wrong, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
   
3. Many developers aren't well versed in cross-platform development, so hiring developers based on that criteria would probably come at a premium. A Windows-only program, while not ideal, works for most, if not all people. Most people at least have a Windows machine lying around, can run the program in Wine, or have access to a Windows machine at a library. Is it really worth wasting tax money to cater to the small percentage of people that this slightly inconveniences?

Except the UK equivalent site *is* cross-platform

[rklrkl]

Unfortunately, all your points are invalid because the UK equivalent tax site is and always has been cross-platform (I used Linux and Mozilla or Firefox without a problem) and shows that, basically, the Aussie government were utterly incompetent when initially setting up the site.

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.

Re:Taxes windows only?

[Trejkaz]

Of course, they wouldn't need to port the program if they made it truly web-based in the first place.

Re:Give us the source

[mborland]

Your post was humorous, but your analogy (as with most analogies) doesn't shed light on this situation.

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).