Slashdot Mirror
FAA May Ditch Vista For Linux
An anonymous reader writes "Another straw in the wind: following last week's news that the US Department of Transportation is putting a halt on upgrades to Windows Vista, Office 2007, and Internet Explorer 7, today comes word that the Federal Aviation Administration may ditch Vista and Office in favor of Google's new online business applications running on Linux-based hardware. (The FAA is part of the DOT.) The FAA's CIO David Bowen told InformationWeek he's taking a close look at the Premier Edition of Google Apps as he mulls replacements for the agency's Windows XP-based desktop computers. Bowen cited several reasons why he finds Google Apps attractive. 'From a security and management standpoint that would have some advantages,' he said."
this isnt going to happen tomorrow, or next week, or next month. training staff to use an entirly new system takes a lot of time and money. i will be supprised if we see this take effect before this time next year
portfolio
They need to bundle that up in a appliance so they can sell it to enterprises that do not wish to
store their data out of house.
Got Code?
From the article: If Microsoft can satisfy his concerns over compatibility with the agency's existing applications and demonstrate why such a move would make financial sense given Google Apps's low price
Sound familiar? It seems like the tried-and-true tactic of publicly looking into Linux so Microsoft will rush in and offer support and discounts. Hopefully, they are seriously considering Linux regardless.
...
Maybe I'm thinking of a different Google apps, but how is running Google software more secure? Aren't google apps accessed from google servers? Doesn't that mean this government agency would be running applications from and storing data on servers they aren't maintaining?
I'm not saying that google makes lousy software, I'm just saying that I would be nervous if I couldn't actually directly manage the servers that were responsible for creating and storing the information.
Eviscerati.Org: All Hail the Eviscerati
Great to see someone thinking about ditching software made by a monopolistic behemoth in favour of the little guy!
Oh wait, Google apps? never mind.
But the article fails to mention why the XP systems need replacement. Any organization as conservative as the FAA no doubt waited a year or two before rolling out XP, so even the earlier systems are only a few years old, and probably far from slouches. Why does the release of Vista necessitate an upgrade, especially if you aren't going to be upgrading to Vista?
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
Other option is just Vista & the new Office. Where at some point you just have to install the new Office (I don't think old & new can be installed at the same time) and make them use it. Now, while I'm sure Vista is more similar to XP than Linux and the Office applications are probably similar also, you know there's going to be bumps.
That said, I don't think the transition to Google Apps on Linux would be any more painful than the transition to Vista running Office. I suppose time will tell though. Hopefully my assumptions are correct and this sparks interest on this huge cost savings?
I guess if you really wanted to promote Linux, you would write tutorials on how to take advantage of this switch to Vista/Office and how to put your workers on Linux/Google Apps. When you make cheap and extremely convenient, they will come.
My work here is dung.
1. Some CIO flirts with the idea of migrating to a different platform in order to get a better deal on licenses.
2. Vendor with monopoly rushes in with truckloads of licenses at "discount rates" to secure their position.
3. CIO returns with whitepaper indicating a TCO in favor of monopoly.
4. ???
If the "ditch" occurs, then that would be news.
for Small Business USA. Fantastic, lets worship another "overlord" and move everything we do to a REAL "black-box" company. "all your datas are belong to us"!
At least with Microsoft Products i can still sell my services, support, licensing, hardware and services. Google? I can sell a short contract to replace myself.
Google? Meh
so that they can bargain some discount from microsoft..
You can't outsource security [e.g. oh look google is so much better at keeping our documents secure] any more than you can outsource responsibility. Why isn't this guy simply looking at Open Office, or hell the other free tools like AbiWord, Gnumeric, etc.
Ah, to be ignorant of technology, but rife with enough buzzwords to be dangerous.
Not only are the google versions of the tools not nearly feature complete, but they're over the internet. Thus guaranteed to be sucktastically slow (especially when a lot of people use it) and very likely insecure in the end (hint: gmail has already had a few goofs). I'm all for ditching Windows, but using online office tools is just short sighted. Within a year or two of the switch they'll be climbing back into bed with MS Office [no doubt].
Also, if you're just going to use AJAX based web tools, what does it matter what OS you run?
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Bowen cited several reasons why he finds Google Apps attractive. 'From a security and management standpoint that would have some advantages,' he said."
What about openoffice.org surely its more secure than an internet app.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
Fast internet access for business customers is still somewhat expensive. Connecting to your own server in-house with a fast LAN will be cheaper in many cases.
C - the footgun of programming languages
the Federal Aviation Administration may ditch Vista and Office in favor of Google's new online business applications running on Linux-based hardware.
The FAA issued a pilot advisory for the Seattle area: Pilots should be aware of the potential to encounter flying chairs any time they are east and slightly south of Seattle center controlled airspace.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I'd like to believe such a thing is being seriously considered but it's probably just the same-ole same-ole. Some poor MS salesdroid is going to be thwacked bloody until he comes across with big discounts and free consulting services and training for a Vista deployment. Still Linux has to be a least a credible threat for that to work. I wonder how many Aerons have come to a splintery end because of Linux induced discounting.
The guy is just trying to get his MS license costs down - sensible enough.
Whats the betting that after his Microsoft trip they will come up with a vastly reduced price?
They should just tell Microsoft - give us Windows XP for 5-7 more years OR we go Linux.
;).
After all apparently Windows XP already works OK for them, and new computers capable of running Vista tolerably will run XP pretty well
It'll be crazy for the FAA or DoT to switch to Vista, there are only a handful of pluses for them (nope DirectX 10 support is not it), whereas there are so many minuses - trouble with drivers, trouble with compatibility, costs of retraining and support, lower performance (so far most of the benchmarks indicate that Vista is slower even for office apps) etc.
Then after 5-7 years, maybe Linux/Wine will have a decent Windows XP compatibility layer and the FAA and others can continue running their apps on a free OS of their choice (or a commercial Microsoft Windows compatible competitor ).
The FAA has a real problem when things crash.
http://wstewart.php0h.com - the sugarbuzz project blog
Could you back this up with something showing that gmail is routinely cracked?
I use it on a daily basis, and this is interesting if true.
The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
.... as they'd have to deal with this all of the time.
- A plane is about to land. Cancel or Allow?
- A plane is about to take off. Cancel or Allow?
- A transport truck is about to crash. Cancel or Allow?
You'd get sick of having to click Cancel or Allow all of the time too.
Oh wait.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
I work within the DOT, there has been no discussion of linux or Mac replacing windows, the discussions are about not upgrading to Vista and Office 2007/IE7 due to inconsistancies with the custom applications, and much of the hardware would need to be replaced, not even upgraded, but totally replaced.
I came, I conquered, I coredumped
We're talking about US Government documents being stored on non-government servers. First, I'd be really surprised if something like that was even legal. Second, I have real issues even if it IS legal.
.txt or .pdf that's emailed around (probably using google servers again, so it's moot).
If the "ditch" office/windows they're going to have to use GMail for ALL DOCUMENTS. Anything else would have to be like
Furthermore, tell me this slashdot: Why is it better to be locked-in to Googles proprietary software instead of Microsofts?
As others have said, this would only be a good idea, IMO, as a "GApps Appliance" that can be properly audited and approved by US Government security experts.
This was a problem in the first few days of Windows Vista at the airport, but now we just click "Allow" for everything and it seems to work fine.
WTF?
Sounds like FAA's top technology official can't differentiate between hardware and software.
Why? I see no reason not to take the word of an AC on faith and stop using gmail based only on his/her (unsigned) opinion. I'm sure the AC has no interest in any of Google's competitors.
I am not a crackpot.
The problem with stories like "Foo may switch to Linux" is that it is now a standard deal negotiation tactic to in fact buy new Microsoft product licences. Or not. But the fact the guy doesn't switch but rather uses publicity to say he might switch, is a subtle hint.
The problem is that even at $75 for Vista and Office 2007 combined, the problems still don't go away. WinXP with Office 2003 was also overpriced, but at least it worked reasonably well.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
What's wrong? Don't you trust someone with an ip address of 64.523.21.HOTMAIL?
Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
Perhaps you should consider the Google Enterprise Professional Programme...
Google Enterprise Professional partners are product experts who provide value-added services or products to Google customers. As a Google Enterprise Professional, you'll have the ability to reach Google's rapidly growing customer base. We'll also provide you with either your own Google Search Appliance for development or a set of Google Apps Premier Edition user accounts for your own use. Plus you'll receive in-depth product training.
At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
The only hack I ever remember seeing is one where someone was able to log back into someone else's account on a public terminal even after the cache had been wiped, but that was quite a while ago and IIRC it was fixed rather quickly.
Collector's Edition
Right band, wrong song
I've tried them (Google apps). The web based word processor is roughly identical to wordpad (free with Windows), or the text editor with OSX. This is a MASSIVE reduction in functionality compared to word or open office. I do not understand how this web based word processor can be used for anything more complicated than a simple memo. I suspect that if you put down any user remotly farmiliar with MS-Office and force them to use Google apps, there will be some serious revolt. Put them behind Open Office, which may be somewhat different than MS Office, but HAS SIMILAR CAPABILITIES, that user will learn to use it with possibly minimal rumblings. What is wrong with Open Office? Why would anyone choose Google apps which have I estimate 5% of the functionality of Open Office ??? So, IMO, any web based attempt at anything as remotely complex as a office suite is going to suck so freaking hard compared to a desktop application, no mater what the platform be it Linux, OSX or Windows.
I know the song, but the rest of it doesn't lend itself to a verse per post rendition.
For instance a subject of
"Singled out the kids who are mean to me"
With a body of
"Get straight as but they still make fun"
just plain sucks.
And by the way, if you see your mom this weekend,
Be sure and tell her, SATAN, SATAN, SATAN!!!"
The FAA can't even successfully roll out an update to their air traffic control systems... But they're going to successfully update multiple applications to run on Linux and Google?
Do you think that use of proprietary software, and especially an operating system is any more secure? That damned Windows XP computer may be uploading all your documents through your Windows 2k/2k3 server to Microsoft HQ, and you'll never know.
bconway makes an astute observation, in that the timing of this announcement is rather coincidental.
I have dealt with upgrading equipment for a government agency, and decisions like this do not happen quickly. First, an IT manager needs to provide a reason why an upgrade needs to occur. Then if an upper manager agrees, it needs to be demonstrated that there is money available for the upgrade. Should these two criteria be met, then it needs to be researched as to what equipment/software best suits the needs of the situation.
Once the needs and solutions have been established, the solutions will be proposed and discussed further.
The federal government (in this case the FAA) deals with the fiscal year planning, and unless using 'windfall' money at the end of the fiscal year, needs to appropriate the money into the next years budget plan.
All this takes a long time.
If this were me, I would have had Microsoft come in and provide a test set-up, then we could have researched critical aspects of this operating system. However, my experience has been that the more critical the task, the more likely it would be that we would use Linux and build a custom kernel -- similar to the one that the NSA has.
Ultimately, the testing of Vista would require months of evaluation and possibly preliminary application development/porting. It is unlikely that this has occurred since the time from proposal, to approval to test, to establishing availability of funds, to actual testing takes over a year in most specialized government cases.
This would lead me to believe that this is a media ploy to bring Microsoft to the table so they CAN get the price to meet the agencies budgetary constraints, and begin the process of testing. If they were going to use Linux, nobody would have heard anything.
I am open source, and Linux baby!
XP's success is Vista's [initial] downfall. If it just works, and works well, why replace it.
Microsoft has a long history of putting out buggy software, release after release, to keep the users paying.
The people there are not stupid, I'm sure they have something planned that will turn this around.
"Hopefully, they are seriously considering Linux regardless."
FAA is outsourcing the whole flight services infrastructure to Lockheed. A rep from Lockheed gave a presentation to our local EAA chapter on the new system and it's rather cool. Each person gets a multi-head display and all the software is running on Linux. I don't recall the distro. So when you call in for a weather report or to check if there are TFRs in your flight path, you will be talking to a guy running Linux. It makes sense for the FAA to switch because they will likely want access to the same software. The only downside is that there will be fewer of these people, so you may be talking to someone far away who doesn't know the local area and local weather.
I forgot to add a link
At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
Remember that this is a government agency. The training people are already on staff.
Security is NOT one of the things I'd be claiming, using a third party to provide my app
functionality by remote. If I were the person in charge, I'd probably nix this one about
as fast as the DOT did Vista and Office 2007. Simply put, you can't guarantee anything
about information leakage, snooping, and so forth with this model.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
...always have your Ubuntu mug, your Debian mug, and your iPod lying on your desk.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Google Apps, the way they're doing it, can't be assured to be secure. It's a nifty idea, but
unless you LIKE the idea of a potential information leak (including business critical and identity
type information...), you probably don't want to be using their service unless you've no other
choice.
An Apps appliance probably would be a way around this problem. Buy one like you buy some of their
search engine cluster as an appliance for indexing your intranet and exposed Internet presence-
that way you get the security and control you need (Though make no mistake, while it is more secure
than what the FAA is now proposing, it's not as secure as OO.org would be on a desktop...)
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
microsoft releases a new version of their OS. Let the negotiations begin.
I have a big problem with them outsourcing ANYTHING of theirs, information-wise, to ANY
IT provider. That's just not something I'd have thought they'd have done. They might
be closer than other branches of the government to be able to do this thing and have
the least profile to risks, it still is a much higher risk of real problems occuring
from them doing this over choosing OO.org and a migration to some other OS in a staged
manner- anything supported would work, Solaris, Linux, MacOS, they all would work
reasonably well for this situation.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
I don't think Windows XP is particularly secure, but I DO think that an IT guy working for the FAA has a better chance of managing his own server environment than he does Google's.
Why are you assuming my question indicates a preference for proprietary software? It indicates a preference for local management...
Eviscerati.Org: All Hail the Eviscerati
How is the parent post a troll?
It doesn't make security any easier or better. IF you compromise the boxes that people are using
to access Google Apps, you've still got a problem. Either the workstations used, or a man-in-the-middle
attack would be the way for someone to go if they wanted to make a hash of things in this situation.
It's folly to presume that this would make things "easier" security-wise.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
There are many regulations regarding the security and control of US Government data. Approved systems. Approved technologies. Approved standards.
And how does FOIA have anything to do with this? Surely the FAA Has confidential and secret documents. Even if 99% is available to the public, are you just going to glaze over the other 1%? Personally, I doubt the numbers are that high. FOIA requests are often returned redacted, meaning that there's a lot of confidential information peppered about.
The concern is not really about price. FAA tech culture seems to be Unix-based.
About a year ago, my flight class visited an airport tower. We met the controllers, saw them in action, etc. The idea was to educate us about ATC capabilities and make us comfortable with the concept of using the radio to contact ATC at the slightest hint of a problem. When you have a problem in flight, your best options disappear quickly. Nobody should waste time wondering IF they should contact ATC.
The monitors were really cool. Huge Barco LCDs. They were square; had to be at least 26 inches. Next, I noticed the computers. Sun workstations and servers everywhere. Not a single MS box in sight, until we got up to the top of the tower, where they had a clunky Windows box. It was running IE and connected to an ordinary weather forecast website.
I think the folks at FAA seem to be going out of their way to avoid MS. Who can blame them? If they had a problem with mission-critical systems that ultimately traced back to "classic" windows issues (spyware, viruses, security, "Genuine Advantage", etc.) they would never hear the end of it. Other systems have these problems also, but not to the same extent. Part of this is just a public relations problem on the part of MS, but their reputation is based on lots of real-world experience. People just ASSUME Windows is unreliable and only a fool would deploy it for mission-critical apps.
The paranoia that limits Windows to toy status in the air traffic control tower is probably driving the entire "office alternatives" process. I, for one, welcome the paranoid approach of the FAA. If I have a problem in flight, I don't want the air traffic controller to make me wait until he reboots. Surely, there are non-critical apps that COULD run on Windows, but you have to wonder about the logistics of support when you consider their existing IT landscape.
There have been issues.
Some are recent.
Both are declared "fixed," but it's a bit unsettling. Contact lists and email are one thing, highly sensitive documents are another.
'there has been no discussion of linux or Mac replacing windows, the discussions are about not upgrading to Vista'
.. It takes the desktop out of the way so you're running a very thin client. From a security and management standpoint that would have some advantages."
He does seem to say he is considering replacing the desktops with thin clients running Google apps on a server. Unless you can get him to publish a msg saying he never said this.
"In an interview, FAA chief information officer David Bowen said he's taking a close look at the Premier Edition of Google Apps
Will never happen (Score:4, Informative)
davecb5620@gmail.com
...full of Linux geeks who are well-versed in Open Source, and have been chomping at the bit to kick Windows out of their agency for several years now. Upper management has been the stumbling block, not the IT staff, and not really the end-users but they will be needing some training. And now that the budget is in a big pinch, upper management is warming to the idea of stretching the service lifespan of existing hardware, free software, and spending some money to help train end users.
Since when does any government agency care how much of our tax dollars they spend? I call B.S.
This is just a ploy to get lower pricing from Microsoft. Dell used to do this all the time with Intel... Every year or so they'd threaten to start buying AMD chips. Then Intel would give them lower pricing and it never happened... oops, wait a minute... never mind.
I'm a big tall mofo.
This is replacing the Office package. Nothing more. Laptops are still needed. Desktops are still needed. It is just that they are more likely to run Linux. With MS, you have no real way to offer true service to a group like the FAA. You can't get into the OS and fix the problems. Worse, all you have are virus fix after virus fix. All in all, MS is bad for you and bad for the buyer. Only 2 groups really come out ahead with Windows; MS and crackers. If all of your customers switched to Linux today, they will still need training and apps.
If and when Google decides to start competiting in all avenues, then you have issues. But they are showing that they are looking to break MS's monopoly. If that happens, then computers will flow everywhere as computing prices will drop. And there will need to be a LOT of training (read services).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
likely just an attempt to get a better deal from Microsoft. an attempt that will likely succeed.
The dingo ate his baby...
training staff to use an entirely new system takes a lot of time and money.
Technical similarities to XP aside, Vista basically IS an "entirely new system" as well, from an end-user and administrative perspective. The UI has been messed with. Security, right from the user prompts down to alterations in driver architecture, has been altered significantly. Applications released roughly in conjunction with Vista (IE7 and Office 2007) have significant changes (new XML file formats in office, more strict compliance with XHTML and CSS in IE7...). Compounding that the benefits to business are minimal compared to XP in its current state. The business case to upgrade vs migrate is less convincing than ever before.
It is nearly that case with my employer as well--we almost might as well move to macs or Linux vs. XP--the impact of Vista on the enterprise thereis nearly that big. Almost all of the intranet apps are designed and tested against IE6. Running them on Firefox is glitchy but it works, but using IE7 often completely BREAKS the app. Over three quarters of the products we sell will not function under Vista and never will ("next generation" replacements are being developed for release over the next couple of years). Fully half of the hardware we have is not "Vista capable". We have XP and it (mostly) works (good enough anyways). Why risk breaking what is essentially unbroken? Do we really need eye candy? We are already firewalled and antivirused to high heaven so is there any REAL benefit to Vista's largely unproven security enhancements? Which brings up the fact that our corporate antivirus stuff apparently breaks in Vista...
FAA's serious consideration of Google's apps really looks VERY compelling and makes a lot of sense, even if adoption would be over a couple of years. The architecture of Linux is more proven and more secure by far than Windows XP OR Vista. The price per client is significantly less. Google's application-server-thin-client model is much less burdensome. Open and Free systems have much better "real" support (MS makes the argument that closed software gets better support because it is backed by a big, rich vendor but I think most people in the know realise that in practice thereis WAY MORE help and support for Linux because of backing by many vendors and a huge developer community, whereas only MS can offer certain levelsof support).
I do thing that Vista is STILL very much on the FAA's horizon though. Government agencies as well as big corporations are coming under more scrutiny and are being more compelled to do due diligence and put as much up for competitive bid as possible--and get the best deal possible. MS' standard prices and offerings are VERY FAR from competitive since they've gone a long time without competing. Governmental agencies around the world are, as often as not, playing low cost Linux-based alternatives against Microsoft to "force Bill's hand" as it were. Even if Google's software suite falls short of requirements in the end, the FAA could very likely get a special sub-$100-per-user offer from Microsoft for Office upgrades.
I'd hate to seeit turnout that way, but anything that cuts down MS (either inmarket share or insane profit margins) is good in my book.
That data must be given to the public if it's requested doesn't mean that such data is "already public." Not at all. If that were the case, why not just setup a huge anon FTP?
FOIA requests are vetted. The data is scrutinized. On any given document, huge parts of it may be redacted before being given to the petitioner. This suggests that even in "public" documents, much security is required.
OH SNAP!
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
There is _no_ Google Apps Appliance. You're confusing this with their search appliance. If they did have such a server, I think it would be fine. It's no different than using an Exchange server, for example.
So, I'd take your own advice if I were you: Please visit google and study their google apps model: http://www.google.com/a/enterprise/
Granted Google does truly innovate but I bet Yahoo wouldn't share your opinion.
From TFA:
.NET to VB 6 and even Access. I can think of only one app, out of many, many apps, that runs on Linux. I'm not sure about other FAA sites, but from what I've heard, I get the feeling that this is the case throughout the majority of the FAA.
"Bowen, however, said he has not definitely ruled out an FAA-wide upgrade to Windows Vista and related software -- if Microsoft can satisfy his concerns over compatibility with the agency's existing applications and demonstrate why such a move would make financial sense given Google Apps's low price. 'We have a trip to Microsoft scheduled for later this month,' said Bowen."
He considering an OS change and a business productivity suite change, but he's concerned about compatibility?
I've been a contractor on-site at an FAA campus for the last 2-3 years, and I can tell you that we are very much a Microsoft shop out here. Just about every in-house app is developed using Microsoft technology, from
So, if we do change to a Linux/Google Apps combo for desktops, it's going to require approximately 28,751.00234 crap-tons of money to rework the majority of our in-house apps to work with Linux. I'm not saying that isn't feasible...but I would definitely be surprised if it cost less than switching to Vista. I'm not a huge MS fan, mind you; I use Linux at home, and hell, I think it'd be kind of neat for everyone around here to be using Linux. But I just don't see that happening.
I'd also like to note that the FAA just switched from Windows 2000 to Windows XP less than about 6 months ago. Thus, I'm not expecting the next change, whether it be to Linux/Google Apps or to Vista, to occur any time soon.
The "native" Google format is to have your data locked away on their servers. Yes, you can export it. But you can just as easily save a word document in RTF. ...Just a thought...
This is the oldest trick in the book. Threaten to leave and then get a huge discount from Microsoft. Laugh your ass off knowing full well you never intended to change. So lame.
The FAA's main data system is driven by HP-UX, at least last time I worked for them. Considering the amount of custom software involved, I don't think they've switched away. I'm guessing that these are probably people's "personal" work computers that they're talking about.
It's definitely nice to know they're looking to Linux for a desktop solution.
I use Windows... like a two dollar wh.. why don't I just go ahead and not finish that sentence.
Why would they be choosing over Vista/linux now anyway, it would be years before a large organisation like that would even consider using Vista. By then we'd be on our second service pack, they would have nailed problems with backward compatibility.
Its a hard enough decision for a large organisation to switch to a different word processor, or even upgrade, an entirely new platform would cost a prohibitive sum in training, implementation and rewriting internal apps. Its going to take a long time to make the decision, and meanwhile microsoft will be "Hey, how about we give you this to stay with us"...
LOL.. and here Microsoft though that Linux or mac would be a real threat to their operations and low and behold, their own operating system is so bad that people just don't want this crap anymore. ROTFLOL... I think MS would have been better off creating just 1 version of Vista with install options. Mac sells 2 Server and Desktop. Most modern Linux distros let you choose what you want to install it as Server or Workstation, and then let you pick the packages you want to install too.
Only 'flamers' flame!
Does slashdot hate my posts?
An executive from a big organization X is looking at upgrading his Microsoft-centric network of products. He thinks he will get a good deal from MS because he is a big shot and the company or government agency is a big deal. He is shocked at the initial price MS comes back with. He knows he is not going to rip-out all the MS stuff across the massive network but really has no other way to bargain other than issuing a release saying he is evaluating (Redhat/Suse/ and now Google) and wants bargaining chips to take back to MS.
Let me tell you the end of the story for all of you, MS comes back and gives the software away on the initial upgrade pricing but nails them to the wall for years on support.
In 5 years, rinse and repeat.
I'm sorry, but do you really think Dell is going to enthusiastically push thin clients? AFAIK, Dell isn't even in the thin client business, they are in the PC business. Dell has an interest in dooming this from the start in order to protect their PC business. This CIO Bowen has no idea of where to go with this, so somebody needs to whisper in his ear. He needs to talk with Sun, since they have considerable experience with Sunray thin clients. Maybe even Neoware thin clients from IBM/Lenovo.
It's probably the usual stuff going on here....
They'll now get a large discount from Microsoft, which is probably what they're really after anyway.
Nothing to see here, move along...
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
That title is totally misleading... They're not ditching Vista for Linux... They're thinking about the possibility of ditching Vista in favor of google applications. Google applications running on Linux has no bearing on the fact that the FAA is choosing google applications...
That's like saying: "I like Hondas better than Fords because the gas tank is made with different materials."
I was thinking of flying on vacation. How long does it take to walk to Europe?
Engineering is the art of compromise.
There would, however, be traing for IT and support people.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
What's interesting though is that the FAA seems to think that the costs associated with training will in the end be cheaper than an upgrade to Vista.
They are probably right. They are using web applications. Linux training would be pretty much;
1 how to log in
2 how to open firefox
3 how to use the local filesystem eg; My_Documents or \Home
4 how to switch users withou logging off the first user or rebooting if the screen is locked
5 how to logoff
Running most applications in this case is not needed. That is google webapps training. It's the same in Windows in IE as it is in Linux in Firefox.
6 Maybe how to run evolution
This has got to be simpler than training the Vista users how to flip the cube of desktops upside down and re-stack the applications on each desktop.
The truth shall set you free!
It doesn't matter much as long as it's dead...
FAA (after several extremely expensive false starts) finally deployed a flight control system to replace the Sperry-Univac 8300s. You'd think they would have learned something from these mistakes, but there are several things that scare me about this:
1) The fact that Windows Vista (an unproven not yet released OS) is being considered for mission critical systems.
2) The fact that Government might tie a crucial part of national infrastructure to any single company (Microsoft or a high-flying dot com)
3) The fact that Linux was considered but not BSD, OpenSolaris, OSX and any number of other OSs suggests that the FAA still doesn't understand their problem, instead they focus on a sole-source vendor who can claims to be able to solve it, whatever it is.
The FAA Reports several airlines have collided with pigs mid flight. Scientists are baffled yet too busy to find the cause, as they all have hot dates tonight.
Seriously though, the FAA switching would be a pretty big step..but I don't see it actually happening. At least, not till something post-vista.
and I'm not blown up by a terrorist, should I thank the DHS?
Sorry, I don't give thanks to the government for non-incidents. I'll thank the FAA every time I take my shoes off or have to throw out a perfectly good bottle of water to board. If airplanes started to crash the problem would be corrected without government intervention because the airline business would pick up the slack. They have other reasons besides mandated regulation to keep air travel safe. If they didn't, people would be scared to fly and the business would fail.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
just in case you wanted a debian based system that rox.
How can you kill something that's already dead?
"FreeBSD? It's dead, Jim."
- A plane is about to land. Cancel or Allow?
- A plane is about to take off. Cancel or Allow?
You do know that this is essentially a large part of what the FAA does, right?
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
Why would anyone choose Google apps which have I estimate 5% of the functionality of Open Office ???
/. probably don't need it. Developers, sales, marketing, certain management types (but not all), research, purchasers, etc. of course have business needs for such things as external email and web, and parts of an office suite as well.
If they only need that "5%", why should they suffer the bloat for 20X as much stuff as they need?
Seriously, *most* people in an organization such as the FAA do not need word processors at all. *Most* people in an organization do not need Excel or Powerpoint either. Especially in organizations like the DOT or the FAA do not need external email and web either. Seriously. When businesses start realizing that in a large number of organizations there is no business need for much, if any, of an office suite and external email, they will see their costs start dropping like rocks in a pool. It's a positive feedback loop to an extent as well. Lower IT costs.
Sure we like being able to browse the web when we get bored at work, but from a business standpoint even many of us on
But not everybody.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
woosh. I'm pretty sure he was saying that the average senior citizen "where's my blue e?" employees would need that training, and was more insulting those employees than your precious linux. Down boy.
Flight Simulator doesn't run on Linux.
I was watching the game with some friends last night and, through a discussion about paint packages, came to realize that I was the only person in the room without a Mac.
Much easier to secure a bunch of Linux desktops that only have to run Firefox to access Google Apps than a bunch of Windows desktops...
Easier to manage, too, I'd imagine. You could have them all be net bootable, and if that's too slow, you could cache them localy (fscache/cachefs).
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Umm...Google apps?! That's even more "proprietary" than Microsoft's. Madness!
If 99% of the businesses that consider Google Apps instead go with a deeply discounted solution from Microsoft, Google still accomplishes their goal--taking money out of Microsoft's pocket.
Google's core profit center is ads. They're using that money to subsidize an effort to undercut Microsoft in their core profit center: OS and office apps. If all they do is drive down the price, that's still a win, because Microsoft is trying to do the reverse. Every dollar Microsoft loses to discounts is a dollar that's not available to subsidize attacks on Google.
As for why an organization would choose Google Apps over Open Office, who knows. Maybe because they think it will be a better bargaining chip in their talks with Microsoft.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
They are probably right. They are using web applications. Linux training would be pretty much;
If they're using web apps, the "retraining" on Vista would be zero.
I _really_ don't understand the whole kerfuffle about how "different" Vista is. It's not. The basic UI constructs (Desktop, "Start" Menu, "My Documents", Explorer, etc) are not significantly changed from XP (or Windows 95, for that matter). People who get confused by the changes in Vista are highly likely to be people who spend their whole day inside one or two applications - in which case what the rest of the UI is doing is irrelevant, because only the app UI matters.
A great deal of noise about a relatively insignificant issue, methinks. Even the hardware requirements - another non-issue, really - are more noteworthy than the UI changes.
use redhat for quite a bit, the weather tracking software and other sensitive stuff runs on linux.
If the FAA wants to gain control of there systems go with a Linux infrastructure, locally. Google offers net apps, but Google is really no different than MS when it comes to your IT infrastructure, keep it loacla, keep it Free. The fact that Google uses Linux on its servers is not an endorsement of Linux or FOSS, it just makes $$$.
Running your applications on someone else's properly maintained Linux servers, may be much better than running your applications on your own virus ridden Windows servers. The 1970s Computer Beuros are coming back...
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
umm, maybe i don't know a whole lot about google apps, but, security? Isn't a system that store's everything forever in unencrypted form a giant security risk?
Announcements like the FAA one have been made before, after major MS product releases. The really big news would be if a large institution, currently relying on a large XP base, would decide not to upgrade to Vista, but instead to MacOS or Linux.
i doubt seriously anyone was trained in the first place. not re-training should cost pretty much the same.
sarcasm:
-noun
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
You're back to the "why do Google Apps?" comment at that point. You've got the apps you need on the secured desktops...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
It's something that could be managed with security. It's still less desirable than other models of thin
clients or doing things like OO.org on a desktop (Each item in that order has risks that can still be
exploited internally, with the Google Apps and thin client plays being exploitable in the same manners
as before, just with internal attackers.) It would be a tolerable thing for Google to come up with an
Apps appliance like the search appliance they sell/lease- but it's not going to be without more issues
than doing middle-weight desktops and OO.org on them.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
The purpose of this memo is to inform staff of the rules in effect regarding the use of Windows VISTA at xxxxx.
Although Microsoft will be releasing Windows VISTA at the end of January, past experience with new operating systems has demonstrated that, before any operating system is deployed, the organization must take the time necessary to test and confirm that the general software applications utilized by the organization will work correctly under the new operating system, and that driver software vendors have made available new specific versions of their software for the new operating system.
Therefore, at the direction of the xxxxx CIO, use of Windows VISTA on any PC connected to internal networks is not permitted. When a sufficient review of Windows VISTA is completed by OCIO, a date will be scheduled and announced when general use of the operating system on the xxxxx network will be allowed.
Windows VISTA may be installed and used, at the PC owner's risk, on xxxxx owned equipment that is not connected in any way to a xxxxx network. However, OCIO will not provide any support for those systems, including support for any other software packages operating on those systems. Also, OCIO will not provide any support assistance to any home systems running VISTA that are being used to access xxxxx resources.
Finally, when OCIO initiates its VISTA evaluation program OUs will be invited to participate. A date for this evaluation program will be announced as soon as possible.