Slashdot Mirror


US Army Will Upgrade To Windows Vista

MojoKid writes "While many organizations are preparing for an upgrade to Windows 7, the US Army is upgrading to Windows Vista. The upgrade will include getting rid of all the Office 2003 programs and installing Office 2007 in its place, and is scheduled for a Dec. 31 completion date. Half the Army's computers (they have 744,000 desktop units) have Office 2007 so far, and 13 percent are on Vista, which was released in January 2007. Windows 7 is supposed to launch before year's end, so the Army will be fully on Vista sometime after Microsoft's next-generation OS is already launched."

374 comments

  1. Doh! by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Surely it must have occurred to at least a single person at the Pentagon to upgrade to Windows 7 and not to Vista?

    1. Re:Doh! by santax · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am sure you are right, but I would keep very quiet too if the last good idea I had was to seek WMD's in a foreign country.

    2. Re:Doh! by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As it will be a year before it is evaluated, tested, patched, and approved, they have time... Look how long it took Vista to get stable.

    3. Re:Doh! by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, but have you ever had lunch with those MS sales reps?

      How many soldiers do you think would say no to Vista if they got a handjob under the table while eating filet mignon out of the deal?

    4. Re:Doh! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If they had some other need to upgrade now, then that wouldn't be an option. They aren't likely to put a fresh OS on their systems. They ahve probably been testing it for 2 years.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should see what recruitment at MS is like :)

    6. Re:Doh! by Jurily · · Score: 4, Funny

      Look how long it took Vista to get stable.

      Who said it was stable yet?

    7. Re:Doh! by sortius_nod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would suspect that over some nice luncheons and dinners that the US Army would have been "persuaded" to upgrade to Vista and not 7. This kind of crap happens all the time in government agencies that don't have to balance their funding sheets.

      In large corporations things are vetted and validated mostly*, but for things like the Army it's all about "chain-o-command". This seems to breed corruption from the highest levels down, unfortunately the soldiers are the ones who bare the brunt of the issues - just look at the joke that the "Land Warrior" project is.

      No doubt the person who made the decisions has been bought by MS or has a vested interest in MS.

    8. Re:Doh! by Elektroschock · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They will discover that Software may become a national security risk

    9. Re:Doh! by Warlord88 · · Score: 1

      My uptime is currently a little more than 15 days. Activities include browsing, gaming, running Matlab (although small codes), maintaining a FTP server, watching movies/anime in HD format, et cetera.

      Not sure about the army, but it is (now) stable enough for my purposes, especially on an AMD Athlon 3000+ based system.

    10. Re:Doh! by davester666 · · Score: 1

      It's not a problem.

      MS will release a service pack from Vista SP1 to Windows 7.

      It's not like there's a big difference between the two.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    11. Re:Doh! by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 1

      >systeminfo

      OS Name: Microsoftr Windows VistaT Home Premium
      OS Version: 6.0.6001 Service Pack 1 Build 6001
      OS Manufacturer: Microsoft Corporation
      OS Configuration: Standalone Workstation
      OS Build Type: Multiprocessor Free
      Original Install Date: 2/27/2009, 6:47:00 PM
      System Boot Time: 2/29/2009, 2:00:08 PM

      Hmm. Looks OK to me. Certainly good enough for any normal desktop (which the machines in question are/will be). Thanks for playing.

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    12. Re:Doh! by dslbrian · · Score: 1

      Well now you can join up and be an Army of One .. the IT guy.

    13. Re:Doh! by SpryGuy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Vista is perfectly stable, and any insinuation to the contrary is incorrect.

      I use Vista on several machines, and almost never have to reboot, and never crash. Uptime is 24/7.

      Since SP1, Vista has been remarkably stable. I do development, and even when software crashes, the OS stays up and running.

      I find Vista more stable than XP.

      Vista got a horrible reputation out of the gate (and it was pretty well deserved), but since SP1, and as long as you run on sufficient hardware with mature drivers, it's an OS I like significantly better than XP. Sure, it took me some time to get used to the New UI (just as it took me a while to get used to XP after Windows 2000), but right now, any remaining slams against Vista are mostly lazy and uninformed.

      Given the way the Military operates, it takes probably years to certify a new software acquisition. They've obviously gone through that work with Vista, and are satisfied enough to roll it out. It's likely they'll begin evaluating Win7 soon after it is released, and will likely upgrade to that in a couple of years or so.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    14. Re:Doh! by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      It probably took this long just for the government paperwork to be completed for Vista, so they're going ahead with it rather than starting it all over again for Windows 7. Got to love large senseless bureaucracies.

    15. Re:Doh! by ae1294 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Activities include browsing, gaming, running Matlab (although small

      whooh! I read this as "running a methlab"
      ae

    16. Re:Doh! by mgblst · · Score: 0, Troll

      What is the difference between 7 and Vista? Not a lot.

    17. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Look out!

      You've spoken the forbidden words! Now you'll attract the attention of Microsoft marketing!

      A plague of uptime posters and a deluge of shills claiming Windows is stable will now infest this thread.

      You have been warned!!!

    18. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Upgrading to Windows 7 would be reckless. Regardless of what you think of Vista (I personally can't stand it), it is wiser to switch to an established platform than one that hasn't been properly vetted. The military and corporate worlds don't have the luxury that you do... their priority is to get work done efficiently, not to argue about DRM or WGA or game compatibility/performance. Moreover, Microsoft's abandonment of support for XP is a real issue to them. If you're ever in charge of a large number of computers, you may one day understand that.

    19. Re:Doh! by Venik · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had a Win 98 system like that. It was sitting under my desk at work and I used it as a foot rest. The uptime that thing had - you wouldn't believe. Granted, the only thing that computer did was keep my legs elevated and my feet warm. But still, it was up 24/7 for well over a year. Maybe Microsoft will use my story in one of their commercials.

    20. Re:Doh! by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 0, Troll

      I had a bad feeling when Vista crashed on the very first boot of my brand new laptop.

      I finally gave it up after it couldn't find a regular USB mouse automatically and decided to stop recognizing my laptop keyboard. I've -never- had those two particular problems on any previous version of windows, though to be fair my win98 and previous stuff was all ps/2, which had its own issues.

      I am thinking of re-installing it though, it sounds like it has gotten a lot better since SP1. And no matter how you slice it, Ubuntu kinda sucks, and a custom linux setup is more effort than I want to expend.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    21. Re:Doh! by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 2, Funny

      As long as the handjob was by Ballmer's hot brazilian female assistant and not Ballmer himself, it would probably convince me too.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    22. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US Army is never on the cutting edge in computer hardware or software in their offices (on the battlefield sure, not in the office). They wait until everyone else suffers through the bugs and the bugs get fixed. Can't say I blame them there. Using the latest and greatest on a home PC is one thing, running all your office operations on that isn't necessarily a good thing.

    23. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? "Casters Up" =/= "Stable"?

    24. Re:Doh! by Jurily · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not sure about the army, but it is (now) stable enough for my purposes, especially on an AMD Athlon 3000+ based system.

      I'm sure any OS that can stay up for two weeks can be used to manage nuclear weapons.

    25. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey now. I'm a soldier. KBR has been giving us handjobs for years...

    26. Re:Doh! by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      Just like Vista to get today's date wrong by several months after a crash.

    27. Re:Doh! by drizek · · Score: 1

      Wow, over a year with your feet on it and it never once fell over? That is some good up time.

    28. Re:Doh! by neomunk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Moreover, Microsoft's abandonment of support for XP is a real issue to them. If you're ever in charge of a large number of computers, you may one day understand that.

      This is the part of the issue I have a real problem with. I don't like the idea that the U.S. Army is at the mercy of a private entity's marketing strategy. I want rugged long term support for my nation's military. This could be easily achieved with either an in-house or open source based solution. Relying on the release schedule of one specific private entity just to keep functioning seems to be the very definition of folly. I cannot see any reason why SELinux isn't the standard installation for military PCs. It's open, it'll be maintained as long as the Army maintains interest in it, and it's as secure as a fully functional machine gets (IMHO)...

      But I digress, this isn't about what they COULD do, this is about what they ARE doing; the U.S. Army is putting itself in a compromising situation under a multinational entity. I cannot fathom how this can be justified, let alone swept aside with corporate mumbo-jumbo about "getting things done". It's the "getting things done" department of any business that releases shoddy products to meet artificial deadlines, only after the "do it right" department has had time to look things over for awhile does the product get stable (if it ever does). This isn't acceptable for something like the military where you need your product to work right, the first time, every time, for as long as it needs to.

    29. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All great powers are destroyed from within. Conquest is merely clean-up.

    30. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way he handles chairs, I'd hate for Ballmer to be handling ME!

    31. Re:Doh! by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As I recall, Windows 98 wouldn't have been able to do that. Something about the tick timer overflowing or something that wasn't fixed until NT.

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    32. Re:Doh! by Odin+The+Ravager · · Score: 1

      The Air Force is in charge of the nukes However, your point is still valid

    33. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, you've lost it. A buddy of mine really likes to use Windows. A few months back, he shows me Vista running on his new box. Says how great and stable it is, and how he's never had any problems with it.

      Not ten seconds into this demonstration, bam! Blue screen of death.

      So I think you're full of shit.

    34. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do not confuse your suck skills with Ubuntu. I personally don't care for the Ubuntu flavor of linux, but just about anyone can get it to run since Ubuntu auto installs and has greater compatibility than any version of Windows could ever hope to. At best the only issues I have ever run into with stock drivers is getting 3 monitors to work. Stop being a Windows fan boy. It's no more useful than Mac or nix fan boys.

    35. Re:Doh! by Gerzel · · Score: 1

      That is not a factor. There is a clear lag time between bri-er personal and service favours demonstrating the readiness of a product and the time for that product to be implemented. Even through 7 is probably already in the pipe it will take a while before implementation becomes actualized.

    36. Re:Doh! by Gerzel · · Score: 1

      I have several friends who use Vista and they still find full crashes of their systems on a weekly basis to be normal under normal operating loads. That is not what I call stable.

    37. Re:Doh! by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      And when the rollout is at it's top there is a golden opportunity for the terrorists to strike at the US again.

      So they better keep the date of the rollout secret or they will be sitting with a crippled coordination.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    38. Re:Doh! by Gerzel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This would be true with any OS.

      It isn't the OS that makes a machine secure it is how the OS is setup and maintained and the practices of the machine's users that make it secure.

      Any modern OS is a huge chunk of software and WILL have holes in it to exploit. The trick is keeping aware of the risks and keeping up both active and passive measures to lower the chances of an exploit to as close to none as it possible given what the machine in question needs to do and the sensitivity of the information.

      There is no "Secure" modern OS over time.

    39. Re:Doh! by Anpheus · · Score: 1

      He could have turned it into a better joke if he said Windows ME had uptime of a year.

      Just the thought makes me laugh.

    40. Re:Doh! by stfvon007 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I had longer uptimes that that with windows ME! I once had a 63 day uptime with windows ME (stupid updates making me restart. grrrr :P) Though I did copy over some stuff from windows 98 to use in place of the default ME programs, and used a third party memory manager.

      --
      All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
    41. Re:Doh! by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Stop exposing yourself to so much meth and you might read better :).

      --
    42. Re:Doh! by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1
      But they *can* switch to a respectable OS when push comes to shove:

      Army Dumps NT as Web Server, Moves to Mac (1999)

      --

      War as we knew it was obsolete
      Nothing could beat complete denial
      - Emily Haines
    43. Re:Doh! by eugene2k · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately not the ones involved in making decisions...

      Why on earth would you want to upgrade an army computer to Vista (or Windows 7) is beyond me. Better spend those money on Linux - in the end it will prove to be less expensive, and the US army doesn't look like an organisation that may not be around in 20 years...

      --
      Apple has "Mac vs PC", Microsoft has "Laptop Hunters", Linux has recession
    44. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You mean this bug? It was corrected in Windows 98 Second Edition.

    45. Re:Doh! by Jaroslav.Tucek · · Score: 1

      >I don't like the idea that the U.S. Army is at the mercy of a private entity

      The Army is largely equipped by contracts from private companies. Back in March, European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. won over Boeing the contract to manufacture hundreds of mid-air refueling airplanes for Pentagon. They are not even an american company. So what's the fuss about? Stop this paranoid "evil Microsoft" whine. You are not concerned about the US airforce using planes from a foreign private entity, but when Microsoft provides the operating system for military computers, it's the end of the world...

    46. Re:Doh! by AnalPerfume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "This is the part of the issue I have a real problem with. I don't like the idea that the U.S. Army is at the mercy of a private entity's marketing strategy."

      Close but not quite accurate.

      The main problem is that Microsoft are so enshrined in government circles that when they choose to end-of-life a product the government feel the heavy pressure from Microsoft lobbyists to conform and buy the new version with tax payers money rather than try a different vendor or FOSS solution. If that pressure was lifted and Microsoft lobbyists banned from government would Microsoft be so keen to end-of-life some products knowing that large government departments would have to switch and potentially NOT to their new product therefor losing their very lucrative contract? Methinks not.

    47. Re:Doh! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Vista is perfectly stable, and any insinuation to the contrary is incorrect.

      It's just the drivers - oh wait - they are the OS by any definition since they run the hardware. It appears that you are both incorrect and also extremely rude in suggesting that other peoples widely reported experiences did not happen.

    48. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yay! Now that Vista Bloatware has sufficient patches *and* hardware it will run sufficiently well to be called stable? FFS Debian + KDE take 800MB and need a 866MHz Celeron with 256MB to run. Yeah man MS is really improving their performance requirements. MSware sucks fucking goats balls when it comes to performance (he said while posting from his Win7 laptop mwahahahahahahahah!). Why do their OSes require constant hardware improvements while delivering basically the same performance in terms of functionality is beyond me. Try transfering more than 5GB of data to an external drive even on Win7 and it will take for-fucking-evah! a simple cp -a folder /dev/hda4 had the data transfered in 5min. MS has had forever to get their shit sorted and they *still* haven't acheived it. Fuck them and everything they stand for. Fucking shitware.

    49. Re:Doh! by Nathrael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not only is it the Air Force which is in charge of nukes, they also aren't using Vista for their high-security systems (which, I believe, usually run some *NIX OS). They are planning to use Vista for their desktops, the PCs the logistics/office guys handling low security stuff use. If it isn't for some moron plugging in his pr0n- and virii/trojan-laden USB stick, the US military usually does a quite nice job at keeping their systems safe (at least, the high security ones).

      --
      A good education is a bit like a STD - it makes you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and gives you a desire to spread it.
    50. Re:Doh! by SlashWombat · · Score: 1

      Cant find a driver for you "thermonuclear device" please contact your hardware vendor for an updated driver.

      Or worse, your locked out of your system after 30 days because Vista had determined there were too many changes. Bad luck, you cannot launch that missile till you validate your system with Microsoft!

    51. Re:Doh! by BrentH · · Score: 1

      The difference is that with the planes the options are about equal in terms of offerings, lockins, support, etc. Also, IIRC, EADS is more of an American company than Boeing.

      Software is a nonphyisical good and as such you should have very different considerations when contracting a software vendor as oppossed to a airplane manufacturer. There's a very good alternative available on the software side, that allows the army full control. Sure, it requires training to switch from other software, but it also requires training to switch from Boeing to Airbus. Heck, it even requires traing to switch from XP to Vista. The point is that Linux security is much more well defined, probably better, and much more transparent and so much more controllable than Windows' or OSX'.

    52. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently the US Army did not get the memo.

      Windows Vista sucks and is quickly being replaced by Windows 7.

    53. Re:Doh! by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      The Army is largely equipped by contracts from private companies. Back in March, European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. won over Boeing the contract to manufacture hundreds of mid-air refueling airplanes for Pentagon. They are not even an american company. So what's the fuss about? Stop this paranoid "evil Microsoft" whine. You are not concerned about the US airforce using planes from a foreign private entity, but when Microsoft provides the operating system for military computers, it's the end of the world...

      Eh? If there's anything more unpleasant than the Microsoft Windows user experience, it's the Airbus user experience. At least with Microsoft Windows, you can always not reboot it after a crash or turn it off. There's not much you can do at 35,000 feet on an Airbus except pray that you land in one piece and are not sick for more than a few days from the cabin air conditioning.

    54. Re:Doh! by theTerribleRobbo · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to do anything but raise his feet and stay powered on. It can crash or reboot for all the grandparent poster cares. :D

    55. Re:Doh! by Lennie · · Score: 1

      He probably never looked at the screen.

      A blue-screen will keep your feet just as warm.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    56. Re:Doh! by 1369IC · · Score: 1

      I have fought this battle for years, first as a Mac user, and now as a Linux user. It's partly just another aspect of MS co-opting the whole ecosystem. Many Army IT people are MSCEs, and they predictably find Microsoft solutions for pretty much every problem. But there is a good reason this plays so well in the Army.

      The thing is, you have to understand what a huge undertaking we're talking about. Bases all over the world, large and small, techs who transfer from one base to the next all the time, bases having to compete for techs in the open market (are there enough Linux techs for the Army to hire out there? Can it retrain its whole IT corps in Linux?), acquisition laws that limit what you can buy and how you go about it, interoperability with the rest of the government and allies, and so on. Also, if you look at the user base, one of the DoD's concerns is that so many people are nearing retirement age. You think they'd be easy to get to use something new? Even that MSCE certification plays a legitimate role, in that verifiable certifications/degrees/etc. play well in government bureaucratic hiring processes -- and those rules are good things to have for fairness reasons. The Army thrives on interchangeable, interoperable parts and bureaucratic solutions that can work in many settings, so breaking into the system is not easy. A company that digs into the process and figures out how to make it work for them does well. Long-hairs bent on revolution don't.

      Believe me, it irks me to no end to be told they're locking down another function on my machine because of security, and occasionally I'll remind them that if they were actually interested in security I'd be running OpenBSD or SELinux. Mostly I get the 1000-meter stare at that point. Once in a while I get surprised agreement, and that's the guy I call from then on to keep my box in good order.

      But there are cracks appearing. It's just going to be slow given the nature of the beast.

    57. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Win98SE and later it was "fixed".
      The tick would indeed overflow, but the system wouldn't reboot because of it.

    58. Re:Doh! by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

      The Air Force is in charge of the nukes However, your point is still valid

      The Army has plenty of Nukes. And don't forget the Navy. They put nukes on everything.

      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
    59. Re:Doh! by icebraining · · Score: 1

      You copy files directly to block devices? I prefer to mount them first.

    60. Re:Doh! by pebs · · Score: 1

      I do development, and even when software crashes, the OS stays up and running.

      It's pretty sad that you even have to make a statement like that in 2009. I mean, we're not talking about Windows 3.x/95/98/ME here.

      --
      #!/
    61. Re:Doh! by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 1

      Wow, your anecdotal evidence totally beat up his anecdotal evidence.

    62. Re:Doh! by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      I live in Western North Carlina, it's in the water here, what would you have me do?

      anyway I'm off to find some more batteries and sud-i-fed... take care...
      ae

    63. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) If the US military really wanted to continue XP support, I promise there would be a dollar amount Microsoft would except. my company sure would.

      2) You can't possibly think M$ doesn't lobby legislatures and government agencies like other huge corporations, right? Of course an open source solution could be maintained indefinitely, but everyone in government likes hand jobs and filet mignon and bottles of opus one.

    64. Re:Doh! by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 1

      Huh. Learn something new every day. Thanks!

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    65. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ubuntu is more compatible than Windows?

      Excuse me a moment...

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

      Sorry, but that was truly funny. You should be a comedian.

    66. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Army doesn't care if it's Open or not, that's not a selling point to them. They spent years testing the OS before considering deploying it. They also require guaranteed support for their large deployment of desktops. The Army doesn't want to do it in-house, that's not their business.

    67. Re:Doh! by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      I work at a company where every developer moved to Vista two years ago (to help ensure our product ran fine on it, for starters). I've never seen a crash or heard of a crash from anyone.

      I think your friends are using really bad or buggy drivers, or have really marginal hardware. It's proably something other than Windows that is crashing, because Vista is rock-solid stable for all I can see, far more so than XP ever was. About the only thing that makes it crash are really buggy drivers, or really bad (failing) hardware.

      I see and hear people blaming Vista a lot of things that have nothing to do with Vista... just recently I heard someone bitching that they hated Vista because they couldn't print. I took a look, and it turned out to be the printer driver, not Vista at all. After insalling the correct driver, everything worked fine.

      I think Vista is getting a lot of completely undeserved crap.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    68. Re:Doh! by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      No, sorry.

      The drivers aren't written by Microsoft and aren't shipped with the OS, so blaming Microsoft and Vista because some 3rd party wrote a crap driver is just stupidity.

      I also never suggested that other people's problems didn't happen, just that they're blaming the wrong thing. And I'm correct on that.

      So I'm not sure what your problem is.

      Vists is perfectly stable, providing you have sufficient and stable hardware (i.e. enough memory, and no failing memory), and the correct drivers. That would certainly cover the vast, vast majority of people.

      I stand by my post as correct.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    69. Re:Doh! by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      I only made the statement to rebut the assertion that Vista wasn't "stable". The notion that Vista isn't stable is ridiculous, and I was just making that point very clearly.

      What's sad is that people are constantly bashing the OS based on ignorance and myth. There are ligitimate things to complain about re: Vista, but 'stability' isn't one of them.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    70. Re:Doh! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I know, you meant to be funny. But, I have to point out that the US military and the US intelligence community advised the White House that Iraq did NOT pose a threat to the United States. The Pentagon didn't ask to go to Iraq to search for nukes and crap, they were ORDERED to by the Commander in Chief. Let's badmouth that man, the blame is his, and his administration's.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    71. Re:Doh! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Since when is the Air Force in charge of the Navy's nuclear weapons? Get a clue, huh? The Air Force has squat to say about when, where, why, or how the Navy manages any of it's nuclear assets. Squat. I never did an inventory, but I would be willing to make a small wager that the Navy has MORE nukes than the Air Force has. If you bother to do the research, and I lose, I owe you a cup of coffee. If I'm right, you owe me a cup of coffee. Go for it.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    72. Re:Doh! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      "almost never have to reboot" and "Uptime is 24/7"

      Obviously, we have a failure to communicate.

      "Uptime is a measure of the time a computer system has been "up" and running. It came into use to describe the opposite of downtime, times when a system was not operational. The uptime and reliability of computer and communications facilities is sometimes measured in nines (similar to the unit of metallic purity). "Five nines" means 99.999% availability, which translates to a total downtime of approximately five minutes and fifteen seconds per year." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uptime

      Obviously, if your computer is unavailable for more than ten minutes PER YEAR, you don't enjoy bragging rights for uptime. Rebooting for an update, rebooting because it slows down, rebooting just because you like to see the BIOS screen flash by, whatever - rebooting means your system is unstable. Instability and downtime are roughly analogous.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    73. Re:Doh! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      What? You would deny Steve one of his executive perks? You're not a company man, are you?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    74. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sure explains why people ask me to wipe Vista for XP all the time. Something about crashes and instability...

    75. Re:Doh! by meyekul · · Score: 1

      I don't think so, I had a pair of Win98 computers at work that were running 24/7 for several years before I finally upgraded them to XP. 98 was a solid OS if you trim out some of the fat and don't let people install junk on them.

    76. Re:Doh! by bonch · · Score: 0

      Don't pin it all on Bush. The majority of Republicans and Democrats in Congress happily supported it. It was amusing when the Democrats tried to position themselves as the anti-war party years later when most of the same people voted for the war.

    77. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every responsible organization is saying to skip Vista, to wait for Windows 7 if you're a Windows shop. Even if you're 6 months into it, rollback and wait for Win7.

      <rolls eyes> But of course this is our government and even worse our military... you know, the number of stories I've heard about having all sorts of problems using Windows shows their incompetence. I'm ashamed at our level of technical stupidity.

      And don't even get me started about the poor judgment of using a closed-source system for military command and control. There's just no educating some people... And to make matters worse, we're purchasing software we could have for free. I doubt there's a single function in Office 2007 required for the military that OO 3.1 doesn't have. And if there were a couple of features, why in the hell not code them (since it's open source) yourself? Just sickening, the waste of money and resources.

      Posted anon for obvious reasons. I don't need any of these dickweeds knocking on my door...

    78. Re:Doh! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      This is the part of the issue I have a real problem with. I don't like the idea that the U.S. Army is at the mercy of a private entity's marketing strategy.

      Given that U.S. Army employs military equipment mostly designed by private contractors, and quite proprietary in nature, I'd say that desktop OS they use should be the least of your worries.

      Speaking of OSS, keep in mind that the Army (and government institutions in general, and not just in U.S.) get access to Windows source code in this kind of contracts, for security evaluation and such. So it's not such a big deal for them.

    79. Re:Doh! by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      "Rebooting means your system is unstable"

      Even by that ridiculous standard, Vista is more 'stable' than XP.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    80. Re:Doh! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      What, exactly, is ridiculous about that standard? "Stable" means, the system can run forever, without a hiccup. Ideally, a machine should run until a hardware component melts down. In real life, even *nix has to be rebooted when the kernel is updated, but that's about the only time.

      MS cannot match *nix on uptime, so you ridicule the concept of uptime?

      FUD

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    81. Re:Doh! by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      The drivers aren't written by Microsoft and aren't shipped with the OS, so blaming Microsoft and Vista because some 3rd party wrote a crap driver is just stupidity.

      Using your argument, Windows is totally useless, since it ships with almost no applications. On the other hand, if I install Ubuntu, I get OpenOffice, etc..

      Yes, it sucks that people blame MS for shitty drivers written by third parties, but using third party drivers is normal use of Windows and this represents problem with Windows. It may be a problem that MS can't solve -- but it is still a problem with Windows. The Linux world doesn't have this problem.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    82. Re:Doh! by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      as long as you run on sufficient hardware with mature drivers ... any remaining slams against Vista are mostly lazy and uninformed.

      So, by that logic, any slamming of ANY OS is "lazy and uninformed". Since, you know, there is the right configuration for ANY OS.

    83. Re:Doh! by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Ouch, troll? Really?

      I suppose it was the "Ubuntu kinda sucks", it couldn't have been the counter I gave to the parent's I3Vista post.

      Well, Ubuntu does kinda suck. I didn't say Linux sucked, I just said it takes a lot of effort to make it really good and I wasn't willing to expend said effort. MS has teams of people who try to do that for me, and I think they tend to be better at it than Ubuntu's people. That's my personal experience with my own personal machines. I'm sorry if you don't like it.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    84. Re:Doh! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      blaming Microsoft and Vista because some 3rd party wrote a crap driver is just stupidity.

      No - quite a few companies that wrote drivers were blaming Microsoft for it due to a poor driver model and unreasonably limited information and time. Your argument works if there were only a couple of bad drivers but not for the almost universal experience on the release date.
      In fact the driver model is so poor in 32 bit Vista that the Pentium Pro and later is not properly supported - you can't use the memory extension and are stuck with less than 4GB because space is allocated for hardware drivers in such a way that you can't use PAE. I really don't understand why people are defending this rushed shambles where even now there is a lot of unsuported hardware despite there being very little difference between XP and Vista (apart from a changed driver model which is more inefficient with graphics and sound etc).
      Microsoft wrote the driver model and all third parties have to go on is what they are given by Microsoft . It appears that wasn't enough to produce stable drivers.

    85. Re:Doh! by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      And yet, oddly according to you, I upgraded to Vista two months after its release, and had no driver troubles or issues.

      It wasn't nearly as wide-spread as you imagine. There were a few companies with drivers that were widely used that didn't step up to the plate. Put the blame where it belongs.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    86. Re:Doh! by olewis · · Score: 1

      There is much more to this. It's not just Army systems being upgraded, it's all of DoD and ultimately, all federal desktops. What is being rolled out (and has been for some time) is the Federal Desktop Core Configuration (FDCC) (http://cit.nih.gov/Support/FAQ/FDCC/)(http://www.gcn.com/Articles/2008/08/01/FDCC-model-branches-out.aspx). FDCC started out as the USAF Standard Desktop Configuration (http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/c/4/5c46c4a0-950f-40a9-9a8f-9af4a2869bc2/WhitePaper_FDCC%20AirForce.doc)(http://www.afmc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123020383). FDCC is mandated for all federal systems (http://techbuddha.wordpress.com/2008/01/31/omb-deadline-for-fdcc-compliance-looming/) and the Dec 2009 deadline is for all DoD systems, which means millions of workstations.

    87. Re:Doh! by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      I had a lan party a while ago and we installed Ubuntu on a bunch of the guys's machines (dual boot). First they copied their music, movies and documents to a USB HD. Copying 60GB to the external HD in windows (xp and vista) took about 12 hours (no joke). Using Ubuntu with a similarly spec'd machine took about 20 minutes.

      Before anyone says "one example doesn't count", this was tested with 3 machines running vista, then those SAME machines again with Ubuntu installed on them. Every machine took the same 12 hours in windows, and the same 20 minutes in Ubuntu.

      Windows SUCKS at copying and moving files. It always has and it probably will for quite a long time.

    88. Re:Doh! by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      even *nix has to be rebooted when the kernel is updated

      I read an article a while ago (slashdot I think) where they were trying to get *nix to upgrade the kernel, then simply swap out the kernel space. This would literally lead to being able to upgrade your kernel WITHOUT a reboot. They were pretty close to getting it working if I remember correctly.

    89. Re:Doh! by paganizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would go ahead and cite references, links, older posts, etc. but I'm supposed to be watching a movie with my daughter in 15 minutes.
      The army was essentially a "whatever the local person decides" for non-critical systems up until 2001 or so, at which time they started looking at the big picture; for instance it was declared a punishable infraction to put a XP system on a military network when it came out; it wasn't until Microsoft donated something like 3 million?(it might have been 3 million $ worth) licenses to the DOD that XP was allowed, around 2004?
      But this... someone has seriously slipped a cog. I would love to get a share of whatever payoffs had to have been involved to let Vista on a DOD network; I refuse to think that NIST is so incompetent as to think this isn't going to at minimum double their overall support costs, and, I dunno, quadruple downtime? With windows all but admitting that Vista is total crap with the push for Windows 7, and the real possibility of a Windows 2008 server "workstation" version coming out, this is criminal.

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    90. Re:Doh! by Helldesk+Hound · · Score: 1

      > As it will be a year before it is evaluated, tested,
      > patched, and approved, they have time... Look how
      > long it took Vista to get stable.

      It's taken them this long to get MS Windows Vista (Ultimate blah blah) into the condition it should have been in when it was released over two years ago..

      How long ago before that was MS WindowsXP released?

      It could be argued that they could have expected Vista to be around for just as long as XP has been already.

      It could also be argued that MS has already got the government of the USA already in its pocket and that "upgrading" (yeah right) is a necessary part of transferring more money to Microsoft in a way that appears to be legal.

      If the USA's DOD was genuinely interested in "upgrading" their desktop computers, then they wouldn't have stayed with Microsoft - because they're using the same old software with fundamentally the same old bugs and same old security flaws!

    91. Re:Doh! by simplexion · · Score: 0

      I still have problems transferring files to and from Vista over a network. Takes hours for a 1GB folder sometimes. Do the same to and from my XP or Linux machines, I have no problem at all.
      That and the horrible "Network and Sharing Center" are my only real complaints these days. It is stable now but I wouldn't say it is more or less stable than XP.
      I don't understand why there is any need to move away from XP. The only problem is Microsoft stopping their support for it.
      Is there something new in Vista or 7 that is going to benefit me?

    92. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      were screwed!

    93. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh...as far as im concerned if youre gonna have to get new hardware ( and the army will have to to upgrade to vista ) AND get used to a new UI then i say get a freakin mac!!! ...tool.

    94. Re:Doh! by Pigskin-Referee · · Score: 1

      Look how long it took Vista to get stable.

      Who said it was stable yet?

      There isn't a 100% stable OS available today.

      --
      "Etiquette"

      It is not polite to talk with your mouth full, and it is not polite to talk on the phone while you are taking a dump. And that pretty much sums up food etiquette from beginning to end.

      --
      Pigskin-Referee
      Linux: Yesterday's technology, tomorrow ...
    95. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless it's am act of high treason, and by stable u're thinking of horses.

    96. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...AND watch TV at the same time. Do not forget the whole trifecta!

    97. Re:Doh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hang on, it says it booted on the 29th of February 2009. I'm pretty sure it wasn't a leap year this year so something is wrong there. Is this an example of how Vista can't even get the calender right?

    98. Re:Doh! by Elektroschock · · Score: 1

      A national security risk as it makes your economy at large vulnerable to an attack.

      "Any modern OS is a huge chunk of software and WILL have holes in it to exploit."

      Sure.

  2. Free vista! by x2A · · Score: 5, Funny

    Cool, am gonna keep an eye out for harddrives on ebay now, might just come with a free copy of vista installed!

    --
    The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    1. Re:Free vista! by chromozone · · Score: 1, Informative

      You might even get some missile secrets on the drives. Our secret of course..

      "Computer hard drive sold on eBay 'had details of top secret U.S. missile defence system"

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1178239/Computer-hard-drive-sold-eBay-details-secret-U-S-missile-defence-system.html

    2. Re:Free vista! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh!

    3. Re:Free vista! by maxume · · Score: 1

      You got the joke. You get 5 points.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Free vista! by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, he missed the joke, it's just coincidence that he tried to make the exact same joke in his reply.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  3. So is this an army joke or a vista joke? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1, Funny

    Someone keep an eye out at -1 for the trolls, I think they're the only way we'll ever figure out who this reflects on more.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  4. Army using Windows Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why, when the job has to get done, you send in the seals. :)

    1. Re:Army using Windows Vista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ almighty... It's penguins. We send in penguins around here.

  5. Obelix was right. by santax · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sono Pazzi Questi Americani.

    1. Re:Obelix was right. by NoobixCube · · Score: 4, Informative

      All of the Latin I know, I learned from Asterix, so for those who know even less than I do (there must be at least one), SPQR is the Senate and People of Rome, SPQA in this case is of course the Senate and People of America. What santax is referring to is Obelix's often repeated phrase of "these Romans are crazy", and applying it to Americans instead. Perhaps now he won't be modded Offtopic :)

      --
      Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    2. Re:Obelix was right. by kigrwik · · Score: 1

      Perhaps now he won't be modded Offtopic :)

      Well, perhaps having having written his post in latin instead of italian would have helped ?

      --
      -- don't discount flying pigs until you have good air defense
    3. Re:Obelix was right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of the Latin I know, I learned from Asterix, so for those who know even less than I do (there must be at least one), SPQR is the Senate and People of Rome, SPQA in this case is of course the Senate and People of America. What santax is referring to is Obelix's often repeated phrase of "these Romans are crazy", and applying it to Americans instead. Perhaps now he won't be modded Offtopic :)

      Except that ``Sono Pazzi Questi Americani'' is Italian, and not Latin.

    4. Re:Obelix was right. by NoobixCube · · Score: 1

      I know even less Italian than I do Latin - and I know so little Latin that Italian looked close enough to me :P

      --
      Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    5. Re:Obelix was right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always thought SPQR stood for Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Romans

  6. You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you always wait for the next release of that software, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything.

    You need to draw a line somewhere. Windows Vista is a good move because it's been available for some time and they've had enough time to test it out with whatever software they might use. XP is getting more difficult with new machines, and if you want to stay on a Microsoft platform it's the way to go.

    Windows 7 isn't so much different than Vista in terms of the operating system itself, and it's more similar to XP in interface than Windows 7.

    I don't understand what the issue is here. I guess some people don't understand how IT works in organizations with more than a few hundred users.

    --
    - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    1. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to draw a line somewhere. Windows Vista is a good move because it's been available for some time and they've had enough time to test it out with whatever software they might use.

      Stop using reason and logic! They should take a bite out of the Apple, leave the garden of Windows and embrace Darwin! So sayeth Jobs.

    2. Re:You can't wait forever.. by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Funny

      You need to draw a line somewhere.

      Yes, and the Army seems to have drawn the line with a Ford Pinto.

    3. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Maniacal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. I work for a company with 17,000 employees and it can take a while to 1) get something tested and approved 2) get something rolled out. When you are talking about an OS there is even more involved - Hundreds of apps to test for compatibility, security and group policies, compatibility with old hardware, etc.

      Add to that the usual military BS. I did a 4 year stint in the Navy and if I remember correctly it takes 7 signatures just to go on vacation. I can't imagine how many signatures you'd need to roll an OS to 744,000 desktops (Geez that's a huge number. Can that be right?)

      Aside from the time it takes to get things done in a huge organization you have the simple fact that Windows 7 is brand new. I wouldn't suggest my mom roll out W7 before SP1. Certainly the friggin military wouldn't do that either.

      --
      MG
    4. Re:You can't wait forever.. by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you always wait for the next design of that shipware, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything.

      You need to draw a line somewhere. The Titanic is a good move because it's been available for some time and they've had enough time to test it out with whatever seas they might use. The Olympic is getting more difficult with new cruise tours, and if you want to stay on a White Star Line platform it's the way to go.

      The Queen Victoria isn't so much different than The Titanic in terms of the hull design itself, and it's more similar to The Olympic in interface than The Queen Victoria.

      I don't understand what the issue is here. I guess some people don't understand how oceanic shipping works in organizations with more than a few hundred users.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    5. Re:You can't wait forever.. by krbvroc1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Absolutely right, I'm not sure why anyone would think adopting bleeding edge on a huge rollout would be a good idea.

    6. Re:You can't wait forever.. by rzekson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, it is more like a newer version of Windows Vista/2008, with two years worth of of bug fixes and optimizations to the core system. The interface does seem to be noticeably more responsive, perhaps even more so than Windows 2008 used as a workstation, which has already been a significant improvement over Vista. The RC version released a month ago has been very stable, I dare say more so than the RC versions of Windows 2008. From my perspective, your rant seems totally disconnected from reality.

    7. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Coach+Buzzcut · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is such an incredibly bad idea. To stick to a less-granular must-"keep moving"-just-because mindset is massively boneheaded considering how many things you aren't safe assuming these days with new software.

      To try and justify that by saying new hardware is getting more difficult to get working with XP, that begs questioning with the following points:

      1. Most hardware manufacturers without their heads up their asses are still writing stable drivers for XP and even NT/2000 (not quite that different anyway).

      2. The trend of "new" is not limited to software anymore, and we're starting to see it in some places with hardware design that is layers upon layers of infantile "standards" that just came out and don't have any solid roots to legacy artitecture at all. Not that breaking ties with legacy is bad, but it is when support only lies with vista and above, and starts to completely destroy the ideas that things such as fixed resources operated upon. These things ALWAYS worked. Too much automation is what led to the magical reboot as a viable solution in the first place.

      I was a Microsoft supporter until Vista came out. I would defend them at every turn through the days of 2000 which I still use. When XP arrived it took me quite a while to warm up to it until it was patched hundreds of times and stronger hardware showed up. However, it is still built on a solid base of usability and structure that anyone who isn't a help desk terrorist idiot appreciates.

      Now, I've been pissed off to the point of diving head first into linux (Debian right now) and building a desktop at work with enough tools that I don't even need Windows on a workstation for an average week's worth of IT tasks. Just to prove a point.

      Microsoft advertises with the phrase "people ready"...but this makes absolutely no sense when the same amount of brainpower it takes to mind all the bugs, patches, hangups and general arthritic-jointed nature of all of its software could be used better building something open-source. Having said that you'd come out with the same functionality, and quite a bit happier, retaining most of your hair too.

      The entire idea of new just because needs to be re-evaluated and completely trashed in some cases. The companies today with the same names of yesterday are sometimes not even the same companies at all. It's not necessarily the companies you want to hang onto, which people do the most.... it's the "old" (read: actually working) idealisms that were great because you got a real return for actually reading and thinking.

      This is making a stretch, but it proves a point: when I set a jumper on a card, I KNOW WHAT FUCKING IRQ IT'S GOING TO HAVE.

    8. Re:You can't wait forever.. by rzekson · · Score: 1

      Windows XP is no longer being actively developed, and Microsoft cuts support for it in a few years. Upgrading to a supported and actively developed version of the OS seems like a good idea to me.

    9. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Tihstae · · Score: 1, Informative

      Agreed. I work for a company with 17,000 employees and it can take a while to 1) get something tested and approved 2) get something rolled out. When you are talking about an OS there is even more involved - Hundreds of apps to test for compatibility, security and group policies, compatibility with old hardware, etc.

      Add to that the usual military BS. I did a 4 year stint in the Navy and if I remember correctly it takes 7 signatures just to go on vacation. I can't imagine how many signatures you'd need to roll an OS to 744,000 desktops (Geez that's a huge number. Can that be right?)

      Aside from the time it takes to get things done in a huge organization you have the simple fact that Windows 7 is brand new. I wouldn't suggest my mom roll out W7 before SP1. Certainly the friggin military wouldn't do that either.

      Half the time I don't use mod points and now that there is something that needs modded up, I don't have any.

      This is exactly right. This planning probably started about the time Vista was released. For fuck's sake, does anybody think an organization is just going to press a magic button and upgrade everything and it magically work with every application too?

    10. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      "If you always wait for the next release of that software, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything."

      If you always upgrade, even when what you have is sufficient, you will never have any money. And those are my tax dollars being spent.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    11. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XP is getting more difficult with new machines

      Citation needed.

    12. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I only take requests for people that are logged in.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    13. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      So let's say they wait. They'll need the official release of Windows 7 before they can start testing. Then they do that, for maybe a year or so. They design a training program to help users with the new system, and plan for deployment. Maybe another 6 months to a year.

      That brings them awfully close to the support cut-off of Windows XP, and for what? What will Windows 7 really provide? Faster bootup times? Who cares. If all their software works on Vista, then it's not compatibility.

      If they don't upgrade in time, they'll end up paying out the ass for special extended support for XP. Tell me that's better use of "my tax dollars."

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    14. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I agree. If I were with the Army I absolutely would not move to Windows 7. Hell, right now it is still in beta. Vista has already had SP1, and will shortly have SP2 to redress programming issues and security flaws. Windows 7 will not be at that same level.

      I ordinarily would go on a soapbox and rant about how the Army should get away from Microsoft products and move to some version of Linux. However, the average enlisted man will have an average IQ, and will be barely computer literate at all. It is to the Army's advantage to stay within the Windows family of operating systems rather than try and retrain a few hundred thousand people for a different operating system.

      ~sigh~ I hate supporting Vista. But, I have to agree with the Army on this one. Vista with 2 service packs, running on hardware that is adequate to handle the operating system, is a perfectly reasonable move for them. Why should they wait another couple of years for Windows 7 to have its 2 service packs out.

      When I supported NT 3.51, I and every other admin I knew was opposed to moving to NT 4.0 until at least 1 service pack had been released, preferably 2. When Windows 2000 came out, we advocated waiting until at least 1 service pack was out, preferably 2. Windows XP, waited until sp1 was out, would have preferred sp2. Now Vista is out, and sp2 is being released, and it finally looks ready to entrust business critical applications on it.

      Windows 7 looks spiffy and all, but I am going to say the same thing I have been saying since I started supporting Windows networks. Wait until sp1, preferably sp2, before entrusting business critical functions or, in the Army's case, functions critical to the safety of our troops, to a brand new Microsoft (guaranteed buggy) operating system.

    15. Re:You can't wait forever.. by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "Absolutely right, I'm not sure why anyone would think adopting bleeding edge on a huge rollout would be a good idea."

      Exactly for the same reasons they are about to deploy Vista now. They surely started planning when Vista was the new kid in the block. They can certainly decide now to deploy W7 now, so their deployment will be ready in two years... by the time you will consider W7 properly stablished.

    16. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why does it have to be black and white? You defended them until Vista? Why did you do that? I just use software, I don't defend corporations.

      I use Linux, Windows, and even some MacOS on my Hackintosh machine. As an IT professional, I think it's important to have some exposure to all of them.

      If you can get by on Linux, then that's great! I love Linux. I really like the new KDE stuff they're doing quite a bit. But I use Windows too, and it's fine.

      So you had problems with Vista on a machine or two and you got "OMG PISSED OFF M$ SUCKS!!" That happens when you install a new operating system on older hardware sometimes. Two years later now, it's a lot better. Better hardware support, better software support.

      Go ahead, keep ranting on. I try to take a more pragmatic approach.

      PS. I hated the first implementations of PnP. I much preferred cards with jumpers because you never had a problem. Now, with PCI, APIC and reliable IRQ sharing it's no longer a problem. It's called progress.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    17. Re:You can't wait forever.. by NemoinSpace · · Score: 1

      If you always wait for the next release of that software, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything.

      except maybe some peace of mind and a little extra cash.

      I guess some people don't understand how IT works in organizations with more than a few hundred users.

      Just like some some IT people don't understand how organizations work with more than a few hundred users.

      Have the guy making the decision pay for it, or have the users decide which they would prefer, you'd probably have a different outcome.

    18. Re:You can't wait forever.. by SpryGuy · · Score: 0

      Vista isnt' nearly as bad as you're making it out to be. Especially since SP1 and all the drivers have had time to be written and stabalized.

      The fact is that Vista is just a better OS than XP. It's more secure by far. It's easier to use. It has better tools and utilities for administering, as well as using.

      Vista is a solid step up from XP now.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    19. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right there with you. My big, blue company has over 550,000 desktops, most of which are running Windows XP SP2. Right on the bleeding edge!

      And by bleeding, I mean our competitive edge dripping from our veins.

      (CAPTCHA was WH3R3SL1NUX?)

    20. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... You just insulted the Pinto...

      If you ask me, the Army just drew the line with a Yugo...

    21. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is until you remember that Win 7 is pretty much Vista SP3...

    22. Re:You can't wait forever.. by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      It's called progress.

      Progress is evolutionary. Progress is guided by the needs of the users. Progress is building upon an established base that you know works. Progress is not a totally new OS with totally new bugs every few years for absolutely no benefit.

      Microsoft is the same stuff over and over again, with a different interface to have to learn. It's called an upgrade treadmill for a reason.

      The entire idea of "new just because" needs to be re-evaluated and completely trashed

      New house, new car, new credit card, new clothes... wait.

      this makes absolutely no sense when the same amount of brainpower it takes to mind all the bugs, patches, hangups and general arthritic-jointed nature of all of its software could be used better building something open-source.

      I think the OP pretty much nailed it. Welcome to Debian. Wine will save you a reboot for anything you can't live without.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    23. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Hey, the Titanic was a fine *design*. They just cheaped-out on the building materials. I mean, let's be fair here.

      On another, almost wholly-unrelated, point: that disaster earned Margaret Brown the nickname "Unsinkable"-- The Unsinkable Molly Brown-- which has to be one of the best nicknames in history.

    24. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like a Yugo!

    25. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      To me, it always has been. SP1 didn't really do much for me, although they did make improvements in some areas.

      I decided to get on Vista pretty much as soon as it was released. I'm not much of one for betas so that was the first release I used of it. It worked fine, and my workstation was (still is) a bit old by today's standards (although, because I spent some money on it at the time, it's still relevant years later.)

      I found it to be reliable - rarely a crash to be seen - the video driver restart feature was a big one. Sure, I had some compatibility issues, but not many. Usually it was some system utility or something, and even on 64-bit now a days everything has been updated to support it. Not a lot of software is actually 64-bit but they are certified to run under it and they do well.

      Because my experience has been solid for over a year on 64-bit, if you're going to go Vista or Server 2008 you should go 64-bit (I can't imagine too many people building machines with less than 4GB RAM anymore; even store machines commonly include 4GB now) and never look back.

      No OS upgrade will be without problems. I think the fact that the big complaints about Vista are (in my mind) relatively minor says a lot about the improved quality of their operating systems these days.

      Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of complaints with Microsoft software and Windows. My observations here are based on the Microsoft baseline. There's a lot of things I really love about alternative approaches such as Linux/UNIX but when comparing Oranges to Oranges, Vista is a good move from XP, and I'm glad to finally see large organizations moving on it. There's a lot of benefits for the Enterprise.

      The bad press has been really hard on Microsoft when it comes to Vista; unjustifiably so in many cases.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    26. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least, I know for a fact they aren't counting laptops. I have approximately 170+ in my unit, that's just the ones I have XP installed on and haven't turned in to get replaced. My unit is just a toe on a foot.

    27. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Good points.

      Support cutoff does not mean that the OS stops working.

      Of course, I am not sure what the regular ( not to mention extended ) support is worth in the first place. I suppose it gives PBH's some comfort level.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    28. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Your..logic... no.. compute..

      Peace of mind comes in many forms. For a large organization, that usually comes in the form of support. XP is in extended support and will turn into special support in just a couple years. It will cost more for Premiere support, and we'll see more computers and more software begin to have half-assed XP support.

      Again, you're not understanding large organizations I guess? I mean, there's usually not "the guy making the decision." With an organization of 17,000 PC's you better believe there's teams of people involved and many layers of concept, planning, testing - and that's not even speaking to any sort of deployment plan.

      It's a large undertaking and decisions are not made lightly.

      You can't leave it to the users to decide what's best for IT. Companies, law firms and military organizations are not democracies. If everything went to vote, we'd still be using Windows 3.11 for Workgroups because "it's what we're used to."

      Part of a large roll-out will certainly involve users. You want to make sure you retain the important functionality that the users require for their jobs. But they don't decide if an upgrade is going to happen - they just help with planning and testing.

      I'm sorry but it seems you have a little bit to learn about such matters.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    29. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      I have nothing against Linux and Open Source. I believe it's the future. I really like the new KDE and I use it whenever I can.

      CrossOver Office is fantastic and WINE is simply amazing. I've been using it all for the better part of a decade.

      All this, plus virtualization and you don't need a dedicated Windows installation anymore.

      That all being said, it's not feasible in many organizations at this point. While I'd love to be involved with a large scale implementation of Linux desktops, it doesn't happen very often.

      To suggest that going with Debian is the path of least resistance versus going to Vista is a fallacy.

      To suggest that an upgrade to Vista is "new just because" is another one. If you're a Microsoft shop, you have to stick with their upgrade path. That's the way it is with everything, including Open Source. You need to keep updated with the latest security patches, hardware support, etc. It's not a choice, it's a responsibility.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    30. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      You're right, the OS keeps on running, but no more updates outside critical updates. If a bug exists you can pay to have them whip up a hotfix for you, maybe. It happened with Windows 2000, although a lot of companies - even very large ones - often still run Windows 2000 servers.

      Desktops are a little different then servers though; it's pretty important to upgrade them all together in some sort of timely fashion. While it's relatively easy to deal with a mish-mash of server OS versions and types (Linux and Windows mixed, etc) it's a whole different story to deal with mixed workstations.

      There's still time to wait for Windows 7 or stick with Windows XP for awhile but a change is going to have to happen pretty soon. For such large organizations, things happen very slowly so if you have the opportunity to go with Vista now, you should do it.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    31. Re:You can't wait forever.. by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I'm not moving to Vista until the applications I would be using on it actually work on that platform. The major holdup is probably that big expensive per seat licence software often relies on crap abandonware from Macrovision to stop you running multiple copies.
      There may not be a lot of software that won't run on Vista yet but some of those things are the reason the computer is there in the first place.

    32. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Mutatis+Mutandis · · Score: 1

      Windows Vista is a good move because it's been available for some time and they've had enough time to test it out with whatever software they might use.

      And crucially, the US military has the clout and money to have its suppliers resolve any bug or incompatibility, even to the point of having software redeveloped if they need to. That is a luxury few of us enjoy. Even today, some of the software packages I need won't run on Vista, or their suppliers recommend against it.

      I guess some people don't understand how IT works in organizations with more than a few hundred users.

      Unfortunately, I do. Seeing how the IT department just couldn't care less about what the users actually need in an organization with only a few thousand users, I shudder to think how bad it could be in the US military.

      Although, to be honest, the best military organizations (and the current US military certainly ranks among them) have always paid great attention to gathering feedback and intelligence from the front line. Some hapless junior-low-cadre victim of the Corporate IT department is unlikely to be able to submit an "unsatisfactory report" on his software installation and have it processed by the command line. A junior officer in the US military probably can.

    33. Re:You can't wait forever.. by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      To suggest that going with Debian is the path of least resistance versus going to Vista is a fallacy.

      I think you get more out of Debian. Following the path of least resistance doesn't necessarily get you anywhere. It's always easier to take another step, than it is to jump off the treadmill. Minimizing effort and maximizing gains, over the long term, is what you should be doing.

      Hell, this is the Army we're talking about. Look where the "path of least resistance" has gotten them lately.

      To suggest that an upgrade to Vista is "new just because" is another one.

      Vista definitely is "new just because". You don't need new hardware support unless you buy hardware that requires it. Microsoft is still supplying security patches, and will until 7 is ready. No one has a "responsibility" to buy every crappy new version of Windows that comes out. That's laughable.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    34. Re:You can't wait forever.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Yes, and the Army seems to have drawn the line with a Ford Pinto.

      No, no, that's a racing stripe. It makes it go faster.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    35. Re:You can't wait forever.. by gtall · · Score: 1

      My own guess (working for the Navy) is that the Army is populating its workforce and enlisted people with...uh...the same crowd that goes out and buys a bog standard Dell and the OS is simply Windoze because that's the bog standard OS. Why should we assume that DoD would not reflect the bias in the current population?

      Put another way, how come allegedly intelligent corporations insist on sucking up Windoze systems when the could cut themselves loose? There are numerous reasons, like the one above. There's also the legacy apps that only run on Windoze because, gee, the code monkeys know Windoze. Add to that a population of Business School Product who know Windoze and are in love with Powerpoint (ones alleged insights always look impressive as bullet points), the question of switching isn't even a question.

    36. Re:You can't wait forever.. by TheLink · · Score: 1

      If the US Gov is sick of the upgrade treadmill they could try to pump some money into making a Windows XP compatible OS.

      That might seem to be a waste of money and something Governments shouldn't be doing. But _if_ the OS actually works well enough, lots of companies and people could save a lot of money because they don't have to upgrade to Vista etc.

      There would be less "broken windows" (the economics term) spending.

      That's a big "IF it works well enough" of course :).

      --
    37. Re:You can't wait forever.. by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      If you're a Microsoft shop, you have to stick with their upgrade path.

      That appears to be the issue.

      That's the way it is with everything, including Open Source. You need to keep updated with the latest security patches, hardware support, etc.

      Oh really? I support an application that runs on Perl 5.6. There are plenty of folks who run Linux 2.4 kernels, particularly in the embedded area. XEmacs 21.1 is still in use.

      There's a remarkable resistance to changing software once you get it to work. The advantage of using Open Source versus Microsoft/Closed Source is that if there is a required security patch needed, you can always patch the version of software you are running instead of having to "upgrade" to get the fix.

      The Army is jumping the gun, but they're not doing anything anyone else is going to do. When the slow corporate migration away from Microsoft Windows XP happens, it will be to an in-house tested build of Microsoft Vista (or something else, Mac OS X is gaining some traction) not Microsoft Windows 7.

    38. Re:You can't wait forever.. by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

      Best nickname ever: John "Hot Plate" Williams.

      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
    39. Re:You can't wait forever.. by inject_hotmail.com · · Score: 1

      If you always wait for the next release of that software, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything.

      Not true. You'll end up with the stuff that you want, not the stuff that the companies want you to have. Notice the difference?

      Firstly, software doesn't expire or age, and is always 100% identical if it's installed in 2002 or in 2009. Even if you buy a used OS, it'll be in 100% working order until the end of time. The only thing of relevance that changes over time is known hacks, and support/updates (maybe price too, but that's less relevant). The only reason to buy a new OS is to appease the licensing gods, or to benefit from new features (or if the activation servers are turned off. MS knows that the biggest threat to the success of subsequent OS sales is any previous OS. When do you think MS will turn off their XP activation servers?). Neither of which are required on most corporate/home networks/computers.

      I'm forced to deal with this issue on a regular basis. I find a product that meets my expectations, and I buy it. This can be things from toothpaste, garbage bags, chips, cars, computer parts...everything. I spend the time to decide which product/service is right for me, then I stick to it. I'm extremely loyal to realistically high-quality products/services with an appropriate price tag.

      Then the manufacturer/service provider goes pissing around, changing "the formula", source materials, our manufacturing/service process to make it "new and improved".

      Then I'm forced to find a different, less desirable/valuable-to-me product, and it pisses me off to no end. I can't be the only person on the planet that feels this way.

      Why? I didn't ask for a change, nor do I need one.

      Back to your drawing of the line. Imagine you need a large vehicle for some reason (you have 5 kids, your job is to move stuff, whatever). If all the car companies stopped making large cars, what would you do? Make your life difficult or impossible by buying a new small car because you have to draw the line somewhere? No...you'd keep buying large cars, just not brand new.

      What's the difference between an OS and my analogy? I don't see much (except the support issue). People should have what they need/want, not what they are told to want.

      Oh, and XP is becoming more difficult on new machines?! For whom?! You are aware that MS is continuing sales of XP on netbooks, right?

    40. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that it's extremely expensive to switch from Windows to something else, such as Linux. The entire IT staff may need to be re-trained to replaced.

      If you're looking for some semblance of central management, you need to pay for that. There's yet to be a real, free solution that gives you even close to what Windows desktops can give you out of the box.

      Again, I'm being pragmatic here. I love open source but it's naive to suggest that you can just make a switch like that. Don't you understand that?

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    41. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      "Seeing how the IT department just couldn't care less about what the users actually need in an organization"

      Are you kidding me? What kind of bizarre world do you live in?

      The users are the REASON IT exists. Of course IT cares about them, and IT is usually very careful to ensure upgrades have as little impact as possible. Generally speaking, the larger the organization, the more careful IT is.

      Really, I think you need a little more exposure to IT in the enterprise.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    42. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      So you're saying: Instead of starting the planned roll-out now, after two years of planning, let's start all over again with Windows 7 because it's newer?

      Or are you agreeing that the Vista roll-out is good and should move forward, but they should start planning for Windows 7 now? (of course, they can't plan on anything until W7 is RTM.)

      Your comment could be interpreted both ways.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    43. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Yea, I was thinking that 744,000 sounds like too big a number to me, too. But, it COULD be right I guess, considering the army is pretty big. Maybe they mean 744,000 USERS and not actual machines. That sounds more correct. (Soldiers don't usually carry around government issued computers with them.)

      I don't necessarily agree with the whole SP1 business anymore though. Maybe that's why Server 2008 includes it.. (It's really just Vista with server apps included, and Vista SP1 came out before Server 2008 was released, so I'm guessing that's why it shows SP1. But it could also be psychological.)

      If the system works with no service pack, then I don't have a problem with production use of it. Vista with no service pack worked fine for most things - the SP addressed some compatibility and performance issues and added support for some new standards but the operating system was already pretty stable and ready for production. One of the reasons Vista took so long to release is that they did a really long, extended testing phase to make sure of that.

      In past versions of Windows, it was more valid. I mean, Windows 2000 with no Service Pack was completely broken when it came to Active Directory. Replication never worked right, DNS records were always all screwed up, and it still relied too much on NETBIOS name resolution. SP2 finally made AD a lot more friendly. But, Windows Server 2003 with no SP was a lot better - most things worked fine out of the box. Server 2008 is even better; I've had a lot of great success with Server 2008. I've done a lot of deployments of it to a great success. It's their best Server OS yet.

      As always, I'm not defending Microsoft as a corporation, but Vista isn't nearly as bad as all the bad press made it out to be. They had to make some concessions in order to finally fix some legacy issues with Windows and I think they did a decent job considering.

      I think it's almost comical how all these people that absolutely HATE Vista are all drooling over Windows 7. It's really just Vista! It uses the same drivers for goodness sakes! They changed the UI a bit (which I do like the new task bar quite a bit - it's like the MacOS dock but way better) and optimized the boot process to make it faster (and it IS faster; my old notebook used to take about 8 minutes to be finally done booting up to a Desktop and Windows 7 took 1.5 minutes.)

      But, it still has the same architecture and thus the same "problems" with things like games. Of course, most of those problems were driver related, and not the fault of Vista. The majority of those issues have been resolved by now and any game released after Vista works great because it was designed with Vista differences in mind.

      Anyways, I'm rambling!

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    44. Re:You can't wait forever.. by MrJimbo · · Score: 1

      I don't understand what the issue is here. I guess some people don't understand how IT works in organizations with more than a few hundred users.

      Well said! Any shop that has mature dev/test/production rollout schedules and procedures tend to be able handle most anything thrown at it regardless of the operating system. There are still some folks that are upset that the U.S. Army is no longer utilizing PDP-11s.

    45. Re:You can't wait forever.. by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "Instead of starting the planned roll-out now, after two years of planning, let's start all over again with Windows 7 because it's newer?"

      Not because it's newer but because even Microsoft (by means of its puppet Gartner) suggests jumping out Vista. On the other hand, while I told "start testing now to get ready in two years", being W7 not much more than Vista SP3 they'll probably will be able to take advantage of their current testbed so being ready for Windows 7 would be probably faster.

      "of course, they can't plan on anything until W7 is RTM."

      Of course they can. Using beta releases for early testing is nothing but "bussiness as usual".

    46. Re:You can't wait forever.. by Mutatis+Mutandis · · Score: 1

      You would be amazed. And frankly, I feel I have too much exposure to IT in the enterprise rather than too little.

      Back in the old days, in an organization of a few hundred people, I used to work closely with people in the IT department, and we got along very well. Even if half of the time I found it difficult to understand what they were talking about. But we all knew what we wanted, and that we needed to cooperate, and were successful.

      But I have seen IT ever more centralized, first on an European level, then on a global level. And every time the organization became bigger, it also became more concerned with itself and less with users. Users are those nasty people who all insist on having different requirements, when IT "knows" that it is more efficient for all of us to have the same.

      I have become a firm believer in the decentralization of IT. Only in small units can you have IT managers who really care and can be engaged in a conversation. The benefits of centralization and standardization are greatly outweighed by its disadvantages.

    47. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      It really doesn't matter if Windows 7 is a lot like Vista. You can't assume anything, so you have to re-test, re-configure and get new approvals all they down the line. New images, new deployment strategy.. everything from ground zero, except perhaps hardware compatibility. But, there's no guarantee that just because a hardware item works on Vista it will work on W7 so you have to test that again too.

      Windows 7 is a lot like Vista, I agree, but the interface (taskbar) is quite a bit different so there will be even more re-training issues. Vista looks and behaves mostly like XP from an end-user perspective, so it's easier on the non-computer savvy users. (Don't get me wrong, it's not an excuse or anything; people will learn to live with the W7 UI changes eventually.)

      Microsoft doesn't say skip Vista. What Gartner says is if you haven't even started planning a Vista upgrade, it might make sense at this point to move forward with Windows 7. It makes NO sense do so if you're already in the process of moving on Vista.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    48. Re:You can't wait forever.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      I do see your point, and I've also seen disadvantages of big IT as you have.

      The problem, as I see it, isn't that the IT department becomes closed off or the people arrogant about it. It's that many companies don't scale the IT staff as much as they should. Small groups of IT engineers are expected to handle an ever-growing number of users, and you simply can't accommodate everyone's personal desires. You have to do everything you can to centrally manage as much as possible, so you can provide the best user experience that you can.

      Even with a properly staffed IT group though, if you allow users to have everything they want you will be left with an unimaginable mess and it can happen very rapidly.

      I'm in the middle, really. Some IT people assume all users are dipshits. I don't. I give people more credit, and I've been successful in this approach then the rigid, "lock everything down to shit" approach. I have happier users and therefore an easier time getting the big things done.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  7. Don't ever install anything ms before sp2 by alen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Vista just hit sp2

    1. Re:Don't ever install anything ms before sp2 by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Vista just hit sp2

      But the SP3 will be out soon, they're calling it Windows 7 ...

  8. Re:yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    All sarcasm aside, I think this a perfect example of Military Intelligence! ;)

  9. Vista in .. by anonymousNR · · Score: 0, Troll

    National Security out.

    --
    -- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
    1. Re:Vista in .. by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly my thoughts.

      Why in in the name of all that should be secure would the military be using windows of ANY Flavor.

      This situation just cries out for SELinux http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selinux which at least has a chance of penetration resistance.

      Even if we are talking about pay clerks and supply desk drones, why take this risk and this cost at this time when secure platforms are available for free?

      Of course it we are talking strategic or combat systems then we have an severe dereliction of duty issue here, and someone needs a little time out in the brig.

      (And, no, don't come around posting about how Windows can be hardened and made secure. That's the "Humvee as Combat Vehicle" argument all over again. Why does the Army need to lean every lesson twice!)

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Vista in .. by maxume · · Score: 1

      Twice?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Vista in .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The MAC functionality that SELinux brings to the table is in OS X to some degree (I see OS X using it to protect data on the Time Machine drive from alteration), but I'd like to see this not just present in all operating systems, but used.

      This is probably a pipe dream of mine, but it would be nice for an app that is about to be installed to present a manifest of permissions requested by the OS. Not just one list, but three -- a minimum list of what it will take to even run the program, privs it needs normally, and a maximum permission list (as some utilities never ever need to see root/Administrator access in their life unless connecting to another program.) The more granular the permissions, the better, so if a word processor is trying to access a spreadsheet document, it would get slapped down unless the user or another program previously allowed this to happen. This will limit damage in case of a compromised app. For example, if a Web browser gets compromised, it wouldn't be able to access keystrokes sent to other applications, or add settings to a user's .profile or HKCU Registry.

    4. Re:Vista in .. by afabbro · · Score: 1

      I would wager that 90%+ of US Army x86 computer systems are not in the field. They're sitting on purchasing agent's desks, human resources desks, etc. They use Windows because they need use Office and various industry-specific applications that are on Windows.

      They likely have legacy apps that they've been using since before Linux existed. (Not the original DOS versions, of course - whatever the vendor's latest, which probably runs on Windows).

      The US Army isn't any different than a Fortune 500 company...and 99.9% of those have Windows on the desktop (I'm assuming Apple is the exception ;-)

      --
      Advice: on VPS providers
    5. Re:Vista in .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Windows can be hardened and made secure. Just because you're too stupid to figure out how doesn't mean it can't be done. I am part of a shop that manages a 12,000 computer network, about 10% XP now, 70% Vista, the rest are various Windows server versions running under VMWare ESX. Not one *nix distro or flavor. We had a grand total of 4 malware infections last year, all because of 'privileged users' that we allowed to install software and who stupidly ran untrusted exes. Bottom line, computer security is about policy, configuration, and educating your users, not whether you run *nix or Windows.

    6. Re:Vista in .. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      The US Army is a LOT different than any Fortune 500 company.

      They can dictate to suppliers. They have a budget larger than the GDP of most countries.

      This is why the idea of Microsoft "support dates" seem so absurd.

      If they have 700K seats, they can pretty much get what they want from whomever they want.

      They could push around Walmart if they wanted to. Nevermind Microsoft.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    7. Re:Vista in .. by rzekson · · Score: 1

      You seem to be forgetting that a software ecosystem does not consist only of the OS vendor, it also includes millions of developers who create software for that OS, either as contractors, or as independent contributions to the community. If those developers want to migrate, as they certainly seem to, then it is better for everyone, including the army, to do the same. Besides, good software is not written by monkeys in the basement of a factory building, but rather by talented people with enthusiasm and vision. Why would any talented person with enthusiasm and vision want to keep maintaining Windows XP for the army? It is better for the army to migrate, so that they can get a quality product built by quality software engineers. They certainly have the money to pay for that.

    8. Re:Vista in .. by Mad+Hamster · · Score: 1

      a Fortune 500 company...and 99.8% of those have Windows on the desktop (I'm assuming Apple is the exception ;-)

      Fixed your math for you. Yeah, I know: pedantic.

      --
      Yandelvayasna grldenwi stravenka
    9. Re:Vista in .. by icebike · · Score: 1

      Windows can be hardened and made secure.

      And a Humvee can be made into a combat vehicle. Just weld on enough armor, side plates, bottom plates, add mill-grade ballistic glass all around rebuild the drive train, re-engine it to carry the load.

      You still take casualties. You've spent a fortune. You are still not safe.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  10. The US Air Force rollout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At the Air Force clinic I work at, all the workstations are XP, and Office 2007 was pushed on to every computer last January. 2003 worked great, 2007 drags ass. Everyone's been having problems with templates breaking, macros requiring endless confirmations, and just plain trying to find where the hell everything is in that damned ribbon. Not fun.

    The only Vista computers I've seen were down at the Education and Training center for test-taking. I can't imagine why they replaced them, the test program we use could fit comfortably on a Windows 98 box (and I think that's what it was originally programmed for). Nevertheless, the powers that be have decided that a monochromatic visual basic simple-text-and-button testing application requires dual core Vista machines with 2 gigs of ram each.

    Your tax dollars at work.

    1. Re:The US Air Force rollout by idiotnot · · Score: 1

      Yeah, MS hasn't gotten enough criticism over Office 2007. Vista doesn't bother me. Once I learned where everything is, I've gotten used to it. Only bluescreen in about 3 years of use was due to bad RAM.

      I have Office 2K7 at work, and hate it with a passion. The new document formats were needed, and I've seen several cases where I've saved a couple of megabytes on files (XP/2K/2K3 format versus ODF).

      But yesterday, with two documents open, Work 2K7 was eating over 500M on my machine.

      If I'm lucky, I can get about six hours of use out of Outlook before it becomes unusable due to memory leaks.

      And I hate the ribbon with an unending passion

      And they made it very difficult to assign keystrokes...I used to easily map a shortcut for "Paste Unformatted." Had to record a VB macro to do it in 2K7.

    2. Re:The US Air Force rollout by trawg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wow.. my experience with Office is totally different. I used OOo exclusively for the last 2-3 years until I got Office 2K7 at work. After fiddling with it a bit I almost immediately fell in love with it; I found it so easy to use (the ribbon just clicks for me for everything).

      I was sure I'd still use OOo for everything but MS Word and Excel load faster and I find muchmuchmuch more intuitive to use when compared to OOo. Don't get me wrong; I hate myself for it - I love OOo and am all about open data formats, but really when it comes to Getting Shit Done, MS Office works better for me (even writing this I sound like an MS shill and assume modding down is in my immediate future, but if you read my post history you'll see I'm not).

      I am farrrr from an Office power-user and I find Office 2k7 the easiest thing for me to get the most out of at a high level.

      Re: Outlook - I run it non-stop from the moment my computer boots to the moment I need to reboot for a Windows update (usually a week :), with no problems at all due to memory leaks or performance issues. I'm running it connected to Zimbra so it's using the Outlook plugin to talk to the Zimbra server stuff; maybe it sucks more under Exchange.

    3. Re:The US Air Force rollout by artor3 · · Score: 2, Informative

      And they made it very difficult to assign keystrokes...I used to easily map a shortcut for "Paste Unformatted." Had to record a VB macro to do it in 2K7.

      Not to nitpick, but it's trivially easy to assign hotkeys. The problem is that there is no pre-existing "Paste Unformatted" command - a problem which existed in Office '03 as well.

    4. Re:The US Air Force rollout by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      The problem with Office 2007 wasn't the fact that the ribbon was so bad, it was the fact there was no other way to use it BUT with the ribbon. At least have a "compatibility mode" option that basically switches it back to 2003 UI-wise. After spending a year with Office 2007 I found it at least halfway decent, however during that year before I mastered it, it took me ages to find things and to actually do things that I easily could in OOo or 2003. I'm sure the ribbon is easier for new users, but for everyone who has been using Office since '97 or before, changing things without an option to revert them isn't a smart move in any software, let alone a mission-critical app like Office is for many businesses when a free version that does 98% of what you need with almost no learning curve.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    5. Re:The US Air Force rollout by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Your tax dollars at work.

      If you think that's bad then hang on because before before the Dems are through there will be a whole lot more of your tax dollars "at work".

    6. Re:The US Air Force rollout by belmolis · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the reason the Democrats need to spend all those tax dollars is because the Republicans broke the economy. Fixing it isn't cheap.

    7. Re:The US Air Force rollout by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      I use Outlook 2007 every day all day, and have never experienced the memory problems you have (and I typically have 7000+ emails in my inbox). I don't LOVE outlook, mind you. I hated it with a passion up until 2007, but I feel 2007 is the first version that hasn't sucked so bad I hated it every day. It's still a pain in the ass to figure out how to configure it the way you want (options are spread out all over and the UI is unintuitive in many ways), but it's not the horror you're making it out to be.

      And while Word 2007 was frustrating at first, trying to find things, the fact is your keyboard muscle memory is still mostly valid (same key presses), and the ribbon UI is useful for for more simple and direct things (and is still fully keyboard accessible).

      The ribbon just takes opening your mind to it a bit. It's no more difficult to assign keystrokes than before (not sure what you're talking about there) and you can easily put frequently used buttons into the fast access bar at the top.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    8. Re:The US Air Force rollout by drizek · · Score: 1

      I use Office 2007 as well. I have been trying to get it to work with ODF, but it has the same problem ODF always had. WHen it comes time to share the document with someone else, you have to go save it as a .doc. Even using docx is risky.

      Hopefully within a couple of years MS will fix the ODF filter and the average computer can be reasonably expected to have Office 2007sp2 or newer.

    9. Re:The US Air Force rollout by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      It won't fix it, it never does. The economy will recover eventually (at a much lower level) in spite of the Dem's bungling bailouts, not because of them. Soon now the mother of all bailouts will come when the Dems rescue California and then New York and then every other state (pretty Much all 50) that could use some of those federal dollars (your dollars and your children's dollars and their children's dollars and so on). You might say, "I don't care, I'm not rich so it won't effect me", but trying saying that again after you have been laid off and then again after six months when you are still unpemployed or undermployed. Its all internconected in our economy today and we will all be sharing an equal portion of much less in the years to come. The Japanese had a bad decade during the 1990s (and they never really recovered fully, even until today), it happened there and it could happen here too.

    10. Re:The US Air Force rollout by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      I'm using Outlook 2007 too, but not by choice - it's the only software that syncs to a Windows Mobile device properly...

      I find Thunderbird to be a lot faster, even when it comes to stuff that should be bottlenecked server-side (IMAP folder refresh, checking for new mail... this stuff is nearly instant in Thunderbird, while Outlook actually makes you wait a few seconds).

      Not to mention it's unacceptable for a view change from the inbox to the calendar to take 5+ seconds, just because there's more than 10 appointments or so in the week view. It's a freakin e-mail and PIM program - why should it need any more than a 400MHz PII and 128MB of RAM?

    11. Re:The US Air Force rollout by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      you can be sure that odf will work everywhere unless there is a spreadsheet with formulas. text docs and presentations interoperate perfectly.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    12. Re:The US Air Force rollout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole point of office 2007 UI might be to make the transition to openoffice as hard as possible.

    13. Re:The US Air Force rollout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow.. my experience with Office is totally different. I used OOo exclusively for the last 2-3 years until I got Office 2K7 at work. After fiddling with it a bit I almost immediately fell in love with it; I found it so easy to use (the ribbon just clicks for me for everything).

      I was sure I'd still use OOo for everything but MS Word and Excel load faster and I find muchmuchmuch more intuitive to use when compared to OOo. Don't get me wrong; I hate myself for it - I love OOo and am all about open data formats, but really when it comes to Getting Shit Done, MS Office works better for me (even writing this I sound like an MS shill and assume modding down is in my immediate future, but if you read my post history you'll see I'm not).

      I am farrrr from an Office power-user and I find Office 2k7 the easiest thing for me to get the most out of at a high level.

      Re: Outlook - I run it non-stop from the moment my computer boots to the moment I need to reboot for a Windows update (usually a week :), with no problems at all due to memory leaks or performance issues. I'm running it connected to Zimbra so it's using the Outlook plugin to talk to the Zimbra server stuff; maybe it sucks more under Exchange.

      Definitely shill talk. MS Office 2007 is absolutely dreadful and the version of Outlook that comes with it locks up constantly. It is impossible to navigate through Excel or Word in any sensible fashion.

      MS Office 2003 was a much better tool.

      OpenOffice is now a better tool than MS Office. Excel and Word only open faster because in 2007 because they are preloaded in the background. You can set Open Office to do that too.

    14. Re:The US Air Force rollout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, your lack of economic understanding is staggering.

    15. Re:The US Air Force rollout by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Obama proposes more and more spending all of the time. His answer is always to spend more. How about some cuts? I am not talking about 10% of the defense budget which won't solve much anyway, but rather cuts to the big entitlement elephants in the room...Medicare and Social Security. You people on the left cover your ears and say, "la, la, la, we won't hear that, 2+2 = 5 not 4", whenever someone with a bit of good sense asks how we can spend our way out of debt. Wishing hard enough that Obama and socialism will lead us all to a brighter and happier future where everyone drinks organic wheatgrass, rides the high speed train, and gets all the electricity needed to live a first world existence from solar and wind doesn't make it so.

    16. Re:The US Air Force rollout by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      My experience with Outlook is similar to yours (though I found it's pretty fast if I archive aggressively -- I hypothesize poor indexing), but the rest of your post is "my opinion is right and your opinion is impossible to hold so you must be a corporate shill". Frankly, menus are shitty GUI elements for something with this many functions. They are pretty good at cueing keyboard sequences (the compatibility kb sequences seem pretty random on Office 2007, since they only make sense historically), but other than that it's pretty bad. That *doesn't* mean that the ribbon is necessarily better (at this point I'm fine using either and I'm now a bit more used to the ribbon). But implying that Word & Excel navigation were sensible by any external standard makes me shiver a bit.

      And 2007 is *not* preloaded by default, and it's still faster to get to anything. A preloader can be turned on in 2003 and 2007 but since Office 2003 it has not been enabled by default, which means it's almost never enabled. That said, Windows prefetching means that whatever one you use more on that system has an advantage in startup time. It's hard to do a valid comparison (a machine with wiped prefetcher data isn't really a valid comparison, because really what you want to compare is the steady-state after using one or the other for a long time).

  11. no surprise by smash · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ... despite the naysayers....

    Windows 7 basically = vista + a heap of untested code and new features.

    Vista has been out for 3 years now and is a "known quantity". SP2 is out soon, and many people live by the policy with MS software of "wait for SP2".

    The military deciding to roll out Windows 7 now would be rather foolish. They need to migrate OFF XP if they want continued support in 2010, so really, its either vista or Linux, etc. Like it or not, Vista is the path of least resistance.

    Besides, vista isn't as bad as the reputation anyway... in the 3 years I've run it, none of the problems have been insurmountable, and there are plenty of benefits over XP. No one cares that it may be 5% slower at foo task when you're running it on hardware that is 500% faster than the gear you replaced.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    1. Re:no surprise by idiotnot · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mod parent up.

      Also, the Army is paying attention; both XP and Office 2K3 are in extended support. Microsoft's policy is that they will provide security updates.....unless the problem is going to cost them too much to fix.

      For the most part, Microsoft has been pretty good about it, but they didn't fix the RPC vulnerability while NT4 was in extended support -- too hard.

      Furthermore, if MS is serious about upgrading every Vista license to Windows 7, the Army really doesn't really lose anything. In fact, they probably save money because Windows 7 is supposed to be more expensive.

    2. Re:no surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yup, 5% might not seem as too much of a slowdown... except in extremely tight, time critical applications, and you know, the army doesn't have any of those so it should be fine.

    3. Re:no surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vista has been performance than XP anyway with SP1, so this is not an issue.

    4. Re:no surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck kind of time critical scenario requires using Word or Excel? They're used by desk jockeys.

    5. Re:no surprise by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up.

      Also, the Army is paying attention; both XP and Office 2K3 are in extended support. Microsoft's policy is that they will provide security updates.....unless the problem is going to cost them too much to fix.

      Can't the army just requisition the code on the basis of national security and fix the bug themselves ...?

      I'd have thought too that even MS would be willing to extend support for a client spending 10s of millions of USD? They must have a couple of people who can code somewhere amongst all the marketeers and patent lawyers?

    6. Re:no surprise by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      Besides, vista isn't as bad as the reputation anyway... in the 3 years I've run it, none of the problems have been insurmountable, and there are plenty of benefits over XP. No one cares that it may be 5% slower at foo task when you're running it on hardware that is 500% faster than the gear you replaced.

      Out of interest, I was looking at hardware upgrades last night... thinking about moving from an ageing Pentium D and Quadro FX 570 to current hardware. Based on PassMark scores, best value seemed to be ~400% increase both CPU and Graphics, with ~700% increase very close behind. These increases are fairly cheap and very easy, so there's really no point some folks bitching about how slow Vista or similar is when running an OS designed for current systems on yesterday's hardware.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    7. Re:no surprise by SignalFreq · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Can't the army just requisition the code on the basis of national security and fix the bug themselves ...?

      Many Universities and third party vendors already have full access to Microsoft source code. You better believe that the US government and Department of Defense have access as well.

    8. Re:no surprise by SpitfireSMS · · Score: 1

      100% true.
      When people say anything like "Vista sucks! Windows 7 is shaping up though" it makes me want to kill someone.
      It seems to me that it now makes you cool to pretend to hate vista without an actual justifiable reason.
      Windows 7 is better, but Vista worked perfectly fine for me for the last year and a half.

      The only thing I can say that they changed is the memory footprint.
      I dont know what they cut out or what they optimized, but Windows 7 Ultimate RC uses ~700MB on my laptop, where vista used ~1.3GB.
      Both clean installs, same laptop.

      Im not sure the realization that Vista=7 will set in, because most people have entirely refused Vista a chance because of bad reputation.
      That reputation it got during the RC stage, and all the issues were pretty much fixed even before SP1.

    9. Re:no surprise by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      Are you being sarcastic? You're not implying they use XP as more than a desktop OS are you?

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    10. Re:no surprise by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      about the memory footprint difference:
      look at this. every gdi window in vista was stored in the video memory AND the main ram (for whatever retarded non-reason). in 7, ram usage barely goes up with number of open gdi windows. there are many other tweaks, but from what i understand this is the biggest one.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    11. Re:no surprise by AnalPerfume · · Score: 1

      Surely the fact that it's common knowledge among IT people to "wait until SP2 before installing Windows" says a LOT about the quality of the product, and a very expensive product at that compared to Linux. It also speaks volumes for Microsoft's priorities, and their concerns for their customers.

      If it's released to the public and not suitable, add SP1 and it's still not suitable, only at SP2 stage it's suitable. Is that not like the beta / RC / release states? By this Microsoft are releasing BETA software and charging a fortune for it. They are using their lobbyists to pressure institutions to spend a fortune on beta software, all the while using FUD to convince people it's more stable and secure that "final" quality FOSS alternatives.

      This is not the FOSS model where stuff is released often where minor bugs are ironed out in time, it's touted as a major improvement where you pay the big money to have Microsoft's people test it to oblivion and supposedly have it working almost flawlessly from day 1......or that's the illusion they keep trying to sell us on.

      Not every Linux is stable, but at least you can be assured with the "final" version of a distro is "fit for general consumption". Not only that but you have a choice to fit your needs; if you want a solid stable LTS Linux for 1,000's of corporate desktops or servers you have Debian, RedHat or CentOS, if you want bleeding edge (where some stuff won't be fully stable) you have options too, like Fedora. Either way it don't cost a fortune and the final release is NOT beta quality.

    12. Re:no surprise by lukas84 · · Score: 1

      They're probably using WinMo in the nukes ;)

    13. Re:no surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...

      No one cares that it may be 5% slower at foo task when you're running it on hardware that is 500% faster than the gear you replaced.

      That's the problem. You buy a fast system to run more things and faster, but the piece of shit software OS negates all that power... For example hardware 500 times faster, but still 5 times slower when you use that OS....nice investment

    14. Re:no surprise by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Can't the army just requisition the code on the basis of national security and fix the bug themselves ...?

      They can. See Microsoft's Government Security Program.

    15. Re:no surprise by smash · · Score: 1
      Exactly.

      I doubt the military would take them up on the free Windows 7 upgrade though, at least not for a couple of years. At least a year or so for any unknown kinks to be ironed out, and... well, if they're going to be deploying vista, they'll need to set up new images, etc for 7. The free license upgrade is going to be a far smaller cost than the cost in user re-training, application compatibility testing, dealing with both Vista and 7 machines in the field rather than a single platform, etc, etc.

      I'm saying that they probably will go to 7 eventually, but its more likely to be when vista reaches end of support... at which point Windows 7 will be well tested (and, guess what... probably on SP2 :D)

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  12. Bail out by CSHARP123 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Somebody has to bailout Vista. I hope, Army is taking it with pride.

    1. Re:Bail out by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      Please note that this is only the Army. None of the other branches seem to be following suit.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re:Bail out by will_die · · Score: 1

      It is all of DoD that is under change by end of year, the Army is just behind everyone else.

  13. I like vista by alienunknown · · Score: 5, Interesting
    There, I said it. And I'm probably going to lose karma for this post as everyone seems to hate vista here but oh well.

    I know there are going to be dozens (if not hundreds) of vista jokes about this article but I still don't know why everyone hates vista so much.

    This is going to sound really weird, and I am not making this up. I'm a Linux user (kubuntu at the moment, used to use slackware and I'm thinking of installing fedora) and I have an old mac that I use regularly too. I wasn't too fond of XP, and I'm not a huge fan of microsoft either because of their dirty business tactics. I got Vista (with sp1) cheap because I'm a uni student. The first thing I did before buying Vista was to make sure that all the parts I had were compatible, and luckily they were as I only just built the computer. Anyway, so I installed vista expecting there to be a million problems, I had a preconceived negative opinion of vista and I was actually quite surprised. Its stable, fast (on my computer, at least) and I'm quite enjoying using it.

    However, I never used Vista before SP1 and I didn't have the driver problems. And I guess because I don't use XP that I wasn't missing any of XP's features.

    Anyway, I guess my experience isn't the usual experience. Sure, I'm not going to make Vista my main machine (I love kubuntu and os x too much to do that :)) but I don't regret installing Vista.

    1. Re:I like vista by Darkness404 · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are a few things that make you different then the average user of Vista.

      A) You built your own machine later into Vista's lifetime. One of the reasons why Vista is considered so slow is that OEMs were installing Vista onto hardware that should have XP and would have ran XP decently. For example, I worked on a Toshiba with Vista Home Basic installed, the thing had an early Pentium Dual-Core CPU and 512 MB of RAM. The thing just barely crawled along. On the other hand chances are because you build your PCs you know how to install and get cheap RAM. That alone makes you different because you can quite easily get an extra gig of RAM for less than $20 and install it yourself. On the other hand the average Best Buy customer is going to spend ~$75 buying that gig of RAM because of the overpriced memory they sell plus the installation of the RAM by them.

      B) Judging from your post you didn't really use XP that much, or when you did things just didn't "click" for you. On the other hand there are some people who had been using XP for everything for the last ~5 years. Then it takes a lot of re-learning to learn, and relearning it a lot more difficult than simply learning.

      C) You are computer literate. You know something other than Windows, you actually understand basic computer concepts. You know how to Google and fix problems. This alone puts you above over half of the people who use computers.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:I like vista by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      My experience was the same.. Almost makes me want to try Vista SP0 because everyone I speak to who did use it seems to be scarred for life

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  14. Doesn't the US Army care about Security by LinuxOverWindows · · Score: 0

    Why doesn't the US army use a hardened OS instead of a Desktop OS. I'm not saying Windows does make a decent Desktop OS but seriously I think the US army might be alittle more on top of this problem.

    what about using a Hardened Linux OS or Hardened Unix OS, wouldn't that be much much more secure. I don't know I'm not an expert but seriously I think they would want to step up here.

    Thanks
    LinuxOverWindows

    1. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by idiotnot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On mission-critical systems, they do. But Windows is good enough for probably 95% of what people in the Army do with computers -- spreadsheets, e-mail, presentations, documents.

      Just like any other organization. Do you really care that the billing department in your doctor's office is using Word and Excel?

    2. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because there in some quarters there is the cult-like mentality and most of the rest of people don't know any better. Most office drones with little skill and ambition never used any word processing program before Office and they don't have the will to learn anything.

      Really... a huge amount of Office use is simply because of ignorance, sloth, and inertia (as well as Microsoft Zombies that happen to be working in the IT department and management). There are are hundreds of programs that do what Office in a better and cheaper way, it's just it get past the masses of users who don't know any better and who don't have the curiosity to try anything new, even if it eventually make their life easier.

    3. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by ibbie · · Score: 1

      if I was the one buying the Office software I would, why not use Open Office, it's free, support better and more file formats.

      Amen to that. The company I work for stopped purchasing Office licenses, for this very reason. I also have to add that Spicebird, while still in beta, appears far more friendly than any Outlook client I've used - especially budget friendly. But then, of course, this is the US military we're talking about. In my lifetime, at least, they've never been known for their thriftiness.

      --
      The wise follow a damned path, for to know is to be forsaken.
    4. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by alen · · Score: 1

      and from personal experience, the military would shut down without powerpoint. you literally cannot go to war without powerpoint. what would you use during Command and Staff every day?

    5. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a complete tangent but everything in the billing department in my doctor's office is covered by HIPAA. She has to keep it all secure. Otherwise Osama Bin Ladin would know about my "incident" with that jumbo sharpie.

    6. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do when some work gets in and give someone access to all my medical info. Honestly it shouldn't be legal to run Windows in doctor's offices or in the military. Secure systems should be Linux, BSD, or Solaris. No questions asked.

    7. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    8. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, when that makes me pay more.

    9. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      "Do you really care that the billing department in your doctor's office is using Word and Excel?"

      Actually, yes, I do. Just like I care that a doctor is located in an ultra-modern building in an ostentatious neighborhood. I don't want to pay for the doctor's choice in decor, landscaping, and surroundings, any more than I want to pay for the doctor's poor choice in computer systems. I ONLY want to pay him to diagnose and treat my ailment. And, quite seriously, my doctor happens to be a Vietnamese man, who runs Linux on his machines, and he is located in a rather old building in an industrial area of a small town. I get what I pay for, instead of paying for his mansion, his mistress, his weekend holidays in Bangkok, etc etc.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    10. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by LinuxOverWindows · · Score: 0

      This is crazy, how is this a Troll comment, It's true. I keep getting Troll comments and I don't see how this is a Troll Comment at all? so someone better explain this. All is says it's a better Office product and thats true based on the fact it has more file extensions which is does and it free which it is, so someone better explain what makes this or any of my other comments troll comments because I really don't see how on earth anyone could see this comment that way.

    11. Re:Doesn't the US Army care about Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except we're talking about government-funded organizations here.
      Guess who actually pays for all those vista installs ?
      In addition to that, like an early poster said, these organizations are at the mercy of Microsoft, any errors Microsoft makes directly affect a country's ability to provide services to its citizens.

  15. Don't be fooled! by bensafrickingenius · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is just Obama's plan to drastically reduce the size of the military!! Would YOU stay if you had to work with Office 2007 AND Vista? Think about it.

    --
    I am not left-handed, either!
    1. Re:Don't be fooled! by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      If you want to see what BO really thinks about the military, see what Tommy has to say about it. It's just as true now as it was when it was written.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re:Don't be fooled! by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      I've been using Vista and Office 2007 for over a year, and I like it just fine. Better than XP/2003 in fact.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    3. Re:Don't be fooled! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, now that waterboarding has been banned, the military is in need of new methods for Enhanced Interrogation. The pain induced by Vista surpasses anything outlawed in any treaty....

    4. Re:Don't be fooled! by bmimatt · · Score: 1

      That should put current wars on pause.

  16. Re:US Army Will Upgrade To Windows Vista by s0litaire · · Score: 1

    lol! I'm on Linux :P If I was Trolling I'd go Anon :P Oh! you're Anon!.. therefore troll away :P

    --
    Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
  17. At least the upgrade to win 7 will be easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At least they have upgraded from RIS to WDS, that will make the upgrade to win 7 much easier. And they have gotten used to MS's new and interesting licensing schemes. Both have been a big hurdle for us. Those factors actually played a big role in us skipping Vista for our users.

  18. The mcirosoft office plauge by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The small organization that I work for as Tech director is still standardized at Office 2000, and that was a rather recent development as pleaded them to move up a bit because so much of my support time was used to maintain various office aps of a variety of versions. Office is a total nightmare. It has to be the most labor intensive application for techs ever devised and it's only used out of ignorance.

    They also had hissy fits when I tried to get them to use Openoffice as a trial (which we really can't use because Mail Merge is so entrenched in the culture and OO just doesn't do it well, at least in version 2. And even if it does Mail Merge well now we can't go to OO now because of the hissy fits and people refusing to learn new stuff).

    Office is a plague on the business culture in the U.S. We have people using it because "they've never seen anyone use anything else." We have people that think they can make super complex documents in Word that should be done in InDesign or Tex and then find that the layout totally blows up when they change 3 characters. We have people using Powerpoint to create 200 image slideshows. Microsoft has somehow managed to make everyone believe that Office is an all-in-one tool out of a load of garbage. It's amazing.

    I can't imagine something that has hurt the computing world more that Microsoft Office (though as this is slashdot I am sure people will post them now).

    The day is coming when I will have more people using Vista or 7 (64 bit to get more than 4GB of memory for other big tasks) and I have to update all the office apps and face question after question from people who can't read a help file or look up a question with Google. I don't envy these Air Force folks one tiny bit.

    I guess that's a rant...

    1. Re:The mcirosoft office plauge by theurge14 · · Score: 1

      Nothing but about a thousand Amens to this post.

      Every company I've worked at says "We will get you any tool you need for the job" which translates to "We will get you any tool you need for the job as long as it is part of Microsoft Office".

  19. Missing quotation marks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    US Army Will "Upgrade" To Windows Vista

  20. Yeah, like 7 isn't Vista rebranded with a new task by fateswarm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, like 7 isn't Vista rebranded with a new taskbar.

    Even all drivers are compatible.

  21. MOD PARENT UP by russlar · · Score: 1

    If only because it takes huge, brass balls to say on /. that you like Vista.

    --
    Anybody want my mod points?
    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that was Funny

  22. "Upgrade" by CarpetShark · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't think "upgrade" means what they think it means.

  23. moderators are cracked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your comment is not off topic, it's the only topic. WTF.

  24. Re:Yeah, like 7 isn't Vista rebranded with a new t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SPTD driver didn't.

  25. No wonder you like Vista. You're a Linux user. by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 1

    Oooh! Ow! Ouch! Yikes! Run away! Run away!

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  26. Why ... why ... why ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why ... why ... why ...

    Switch to an open source product, Ubuntu lts, use openoffice for you office needs, and save the tax payers a bundle of money.

    In the process, generate a new IT re-education process within the government to train people on Linux and just be rid of Windows ...

    1. Re:Why ... why ... why ... by couchslug · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "In the process, generate a new IT re-education process within the government to train people on Linux and just be rid of Windows ..."

      That is workable, just as it was when we switched from green-screen terminals to Windows in the USAF.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:Why ... why ... why ... by icannotthinkofaname · · Score: 2, Funny

      You wanna know why? Well, the bailout money has to be spent somehow, right?

      --
      Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
  27. Your tax dollars at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I can't believe this is what we pay for

  28. Army Intelligence... by Hercules+Peanut · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...need I say more?

  29. Save Windows Vista! by David+Gerard · · Score: 3, Funny

    No CHEESE-EATING SURRENDER OS for OUR boys! They know the MILITARY MIGHT of VISTA is what the world needs! FREEDOM ISN'T FREE and VISTA IS FREEDOOM!

    Join SAVE VISTA on Facebook! (Original blog post.) We want ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE to tell Microsoft to abandon their Windows 7 foolishness and go back to Vista! We have 89 so far. Only 99,911 to go!

    Like Chrysler, like Hummer, like Edsel - "Vista" is a name that will be remembered as the greatest operating system in Microsoft's history.

    Just Say "No" To Seven -

    SAVE VISTA!

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
    1. Re:Save Windows Vista! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like the United States Army just did.

      Anything else?

  30. Re:yes! by Jurily · · Score: 3, Funny

    All sarcasm aside, I think this a perfect example of Military Intelligence! ;)

    The Russians use Linux, so they figured they'll be incompatible to avoid spying.

  31. You have pulled the trigger... by quonsar · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...this could be dangerous. Are you sure you wish to pull the trigger?

    1. Re:You have pulled the trigger... by CmmdrKeen · · Score: 1

      Process "Missile" wants to fire.
      Cancel or Allow?

    2. Re:You have pulled the trigger... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pop-up: As an administrator, you do not have the necessary privileges to do this. Request denied.

    3. Re:You have pulled the trigger... by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

      Are you sure you wish to pull the trigger?

      YES
      You've just shot yourself in the foot.
      Do you want me to call an ambulance?
      YES
      Clippy is calling an ambulance. Allow or Deny?
      A
      Windows has detected a process tried to use the modem to dial out. This is suspicious behaviour often caused by viruses or malware. Therefore it has been blocked.

  32. Taxpayers money being well spent by jocknerd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I should know. I work for a city government and we are getting ready to bring in Sharepoint. No business plan, no requirements documents like are needed for the small web apps I write. We're bringing Sharepoint in because the CIO is a sheep just like 95% of the other CIO's out there. If they see others doing it, they're going to follow suit. Meanwhile, due to budget constraints, our libraries will be open fewer hours. Yep, we've got our priorities in order.

    1. Re:Taxpayers money being well spent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I work in Government as well and feel your pain. Given Microsoft got the Massachusetts' CIO fired in 2006 maybe CIOs have a reason to worry.

      It would be interesting to know what % of Microsoft's income is from the U.S. government.

    2. Re:Taxpayers money being well spent by Shados · · Score: 1

      Of course, assuming we're talking about Sharepoint Services and not Office Sharepoint Server, "bringing in Sharepoint" in Windows Server 2003 is -> add/remove programs -> windows components -> Sharepoint -> click ok, wait a bit, run the wizard, you're done. (in 2008 you have to download it, so you can't be as lazy). And assuming the Windows servers are already there, it doesn't cost you anything.

    3. Re:Taxpayers money being well spent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The military is even worse. I was in the service myself for 4 years and saw what I'm guessing added up to several hundred million taxpayer dollars wasted on shit decisions first hand. Whenever I'd question higher ranking personnel about some of these decisions the resounding response was something of "Why do you care? It's not your money.".

      This upgrade decision may have been to avoid falling outside of Microsoft's support cycle, but it also could have simply been the army had a budget surplus and decided to burn it before they hit the end of their quota. For those who don't know, military units are assigned quarterly budgets based on projected spending, however, if they don't use the budget they been alloted within a given time period, the unit not only loses access to the money, but also is also placed in a lower budget bracket (they get access to less money the next budget period), so they have little incentive NOT to use the cash they've been assigned. To deal with this most units have what is called a FWA (Fraud, Waste and Abuse) officer to report stuff like this, but if there's one thing hated inside the military, it's a whistleblower, especially from within. You can send in a complaint, but can also look forward to being effectively "non-ranked" (military term for denied for future promotion) via negative performance ratings, assigned crap duty, and being continually put on watch duty.

    4. Re:Taxpayers money being well spent by deprecated · · Score: 1

      Seattle?

    5. Re:Taxpayers money being well spent by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      If you're using a wiki now, Sharepoint is just a slightly-more-structured wiki. If not, you might find that you benefit from a wiki-like website at your workplace.

    6. Re:Taxpayers money being well spent by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Why don't you leak this to the media? Your city newspaper's investigative journalist could make this into a juicy story, and you would do some good to the people of your city (I hope that last part motivates you).

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    7. Re:Taxpayers money being well spent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I should know. I work for a city government and we are getting ready to bring in Sharepoint. No business plan, no requirements documents like are needed for the small web apps I write. We're bringing Sharepoint in because the CIO is a sheep just like 95% of the other CIO's out there. If they see others doing it, they're going to follow suit. Meanwhile, due to budget constraints, our libraries will be open fewer hours. Yep, we've got our priorities in order.

      Sharepoint is just dreadful. It is unstable, bad UI and poor quality. It does not even have the feature set or stability of Lotus Notes Release 1 from the early 1990s.

  33. Everyone knows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    our defense budget is too big to not do upgrades like this...

  34. Cyberwar by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Funny

    The 1st step to cripple enemy networks is convince them that something unsecure is the most secure system of the planet. That is really a subtle plan, but surely will work.

    1. Re:Cyberwar by Joren · · Score: 1

      The 1st step to cripple enemy networks is convince them that something unsecure is the most secure system of the planet. That is really a subtle plan, but surely will work.

      +5 Funny? This sounds eerily insightful to me...

      --
      -- Joren
    2. Re:Cyberwar by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the Army can retaliate appropriately.

      "Turning Seattle into a glass crater would only be undertaken strictly as the minimum required surgical military action," emphasised Chilton, "and not in any way out of twenty-five years' bitter resentment and frustration at computing machinery."

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
  35. Military QA by sanosuke001 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The place I work at (Air Force) runs a different copy of Vista than you can actually buy. It has to be thoroughly tested and OK'd by the Air Force before they are even allowed to install it on any machines on the network.

    The Army probably does the same. Rolling out Vista now is like they started rolling it out on release date. They couldn't have rolled it out any sooner if they wanted to. Same for Windows 7. The earliest they'll see it ok'd for use is probably two years from release. Why people make a big deal out of it? Probably because they're ignorant and want to make a fuss.

    --
    -SaNo
    1. Re:Military QA by NoobixCube · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'd like to preface this comment by saying I don't mean to be snarky, but given the general tone of it people are bound to misinterpret. This is Slashdot, afterall...

      How much does the QA cost in terms of money and man-hours? How much is Microsoft billing the US government for 744,000 copies of Vista and Office? It just seems to me that no matter how big of a "discount" Microsoft is giving, you can't beat free. Linux is proven to be secure and stable, even without military QA. I'm sure it would still be put through it, and rightly so, but it would take much less work to get any gaps in Linux sealed up tighter than Windows ever could be.

      --
      Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    2. Re:Military QA by soulsteal · · Score: 1

      This link will help: http://cit.nih.gov/Support/FAQ/FDCC/

      FDCC is what the USAF and all other Armed Services are currently moving toward. It's Vista Enterprise with a bunch of tweaks.

    3. Re:Military QA by smchris · · Score: 1

      Bear in mind that my sources are sci fi convention panels over a number of years on the future of warfare but it is my understanding the army has been all over linux -- but as an embedded system. One would think there would be some intelligence in an SElinux military desktop but, remember, we've had 25 years of "privatize everything" and having the government develop what they want themselves isn't the way we do things around here.

    4. Re:Military QA by sanosuke001 · · Score: 1

      The Air Force has QA'd Debian and Ubuntu that I know of but they're a couple major versions behind.

      I know, in our group, that we can choose which OS we use based on personal preference. Also, we write Java apps so we also need to be cross-platform so we have some mac guys, a couple linux guys, but mostly pc guys.

      But the military does QA more than just Microsoft apps. However, they do still require exchange but have webmail set up for people who can't run windows (as their OS or through emulation which most of the linux guys in our group do)

      --
      -SaNo
    5. Re:Military QA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're forgetting that the point of government spending is to spread the wealth around, not to actually be efficient. Consider that the U.S. government can't even buy office supplies at the lowest possible price. They're only supposed to order from "http://www.gsaadvantage.gov" and should give preference to local female or minority-owned small businesses, regardless of price, if not using this website.

    6. Re:Military QA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I don't work for the US military, I am an Air Force brat who's lived on military bases for the vast majority of my life.

      You have to remember, the US military already uses a fair amount of software for Windows. At this point it's easier to go through all that hassle of checking and fixing up and a new (win32) OS then it is to check and fix up a completely different new OS and as well as all of their software and training all the IT people to deal with the new stuff. Moving to Linux would cost a LOT more in terms of both time and money.

      As much as I'd like to see Linux on all the boxen next time I'm on base, it's not really worth the extra hassle. The US military has too much legacy shit to deal with.

    7. Re:Military QA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read the Orange Book and think Vista and my brain spurts blood.

      I think "mission critical" and basically any Microsoft product and my brain collapses.

      I don't think most of the 'Win-defenders' here have any fucking idea at all what "mission critical" means - and I'm beginning to think our military deciders have forgotten what it means as well.

  36. Re:yes! by Warlord88 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Russians use Linux

    You mean their brand new, very own OS, right?

  37. Government waste by pkbarbiedoll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ubuntu and Open Office would save this country millions of dollars.

    1. Re:Government waste by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Eventually. In the short term, they'd cost hundreds of millions to migrate to. If you know anything about finances, then you know that if the upfront costs of a program exceed the yearly savings by a factor greater than or equal to the reciprocal of the ROI you could get elsewhere, then that program is simply not worth implementing.

      (If you know a bit more, you also realize that you have to take into account the fact that prices of different things go up at different rates, but realistically MS isn't going to price themselves out of business. If anything, they'll lower prices as FOSS becomes more of a threat.)

      Put simply, the cost of changing to a fully FOSS system *can* make it the more expensive choice, even when it's free.

    2. Re:Government waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This move is the government's way of bailing out Microsoft.

    3. Re:Government waste by isorox · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu and Open Office would save this country millions of dollars.

      It could save most countries millions, but I assume you're talking about the U.S. Every dollar spent on Microsoft software goes to Microsoft, an American company. The money is just shifted from the tax payer to microsoft, which then pays taxes, or pays American workers. It doesn't leave the country, so you can't save millions.

      Now if the UK were to switch, they'd no longer from giving the money to America, it would go to Canonical (a UK company I believe) you may have a point.

    4. Re:Government waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ubuntu and Open Office would save this country millions of dollars.

      What is this fascination with Ubuntu? There are far better distributions available that are more stable and work better with improved security and cleaner UI integration and better hardware detection than Ubuntu.

    5. Re:Government waste by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu and Open Office would save this country millions of dollars.

      You have a hardware compatibility problem there, though - your politicians.

  38. I already knew this... by Schnoogs · · Score: 1

    I saw Terminator 4 today and Skynet's displays were all running Vista.

  39. Re:US Army Will Upgrade To Windows Vista by NoobixCube · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The NT kernel has many great features that put it on a par with Unix in terms of security and functionality. As yet, no operating system using the NT kernel has actually used those features. Even UAC is a bizarre hack of a permissive userland, and doesn't use the kernel's security features. It's about as secure as Windows 98, thanks to Microsoft's butchery of the userland in the name of backwards compatibility.

    --
    Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
  40. Re:yes! by russlar · · Score: 2, Funny

    The Russians use Linux

    In Soviet Russia, kernel compiles you?

    --
    Anybody want my mod points?
  41. Get me Bill Gates! by Mike610544 · · Score: 1

    Something like this will almost certainly be the result.

    --
    ... also, I can kill you with my brain.
  42. Ut-oh by perigee369 · · Score: 1

    That's it folks, our armed forces are screwed!

  43. h8 vista h8h8h8 by TiggertheMad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally, my hatred of vista isn't because of hardware support. For the most part, MS is pretty good about providing support of all the crap you can possibly come up with to plug into your computer. When a new driver API is released, sure, the OEMs have to get off their ass and write new drivers.

    my hatred of vista is based off the fact that there is a ton of stupid crap that is loaded on the OS that does nothing but look cool and slow your machine down. I don't want any fucking Aero-transparent window bullshit. I want an os that is like a formula 1 car: fast as hell and without a single non-essential part.

    Between win 2k and win7(~8 years) the memory footprint of the OS has grown from ~100mb to ~500mb. What real utility do I get for all that? They still have not bought out winzip and winrar and integrated it in the OS, which is way more basic and useful than services to 'detect unused icons on my desktop'. Using ISO images is pretty much an accepted standard these days, and how much support is there for them in vista? But there is a list of idiotic services running as long as your arm on a fresh install of vista. (Fun game, what percentage of them do you actually fully understand what they are doing on/for your system? I'm a professional windows programmer, and I understand perhaps 75%, wtf?)

    No, most people will probably tell you that vista seems to run just fine. MS has spent a lot of time turning their OS into something that is easy and pretty to use. I use the OS for a living. I don't have time to fuck around all day with pretty 'abc block' themes that make the desktop animate windows when they are closed.

    I suspect that a lot of people hate vista for what it isn't as much as for what it is.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with your desire is that it doesn't match the rest of the world, which seems to want a car more like the kind you find on the street than what they're driving this weekend in Monaco. Or Indy. Or Charlotte. Which is a custom-built machine that requires a team of over a dozen people to keep operating.

      For one weekend.

      I'm sure if you wanted to pay Microsoft the equivalent of what it costs to run a race car every weekend they'd be willing to give you what you want, which is probably what the Army is getting anyway, but until then, you'll have to live with the LCD.

    2. Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely agree! That's exactly what irritates me about Vista. I didn't get any of the common issues that people had when Vista came out. It was a bit slow as the hardware barely met the spec, but with Aero off, it was nice. I actually went into Vista with a neutral, nearly positive view point (Our uni provided a lot of MS software via our tuition, so price was little issue).

      But after using it, I feel like I have lost massive ground in productivity on a laptop. It looks cool and all, but work/business wise, I am spending more resources and getting far less done with it. There are pointless, multiple ways to access the same config/customizations. Interfaces are not crisp and predictable. They took their crappy 'commonly used line items' menu idea and plugged it into the rest of the UI. Messages and help menus are still just as useless. Networking interface still feels like crap. Etc...

      Overall, MS took a massive dive in productivity when it came to designing the computer-user interface. It looks all flashy and cool, but at the end of the day, I want to do some bloody work and get some return on this expensive asset. I just don't understand what Vista offers in additional value (other than the security model) over what I currently use. If anything, we have lost a lot of ground. As you mentioned some, there are _many_ outside the hood feature sets that are simple, yet provide a tremendous amount of value to the user with very little investment. MS should have allocated just one programmer for these simple productivity gains.

      For now, productivity and reliability with MS is simply... XP (or 2003).

      End rant.

      And for the sibling AC post: I think you got it wrong, the parent and I want a simple car that gets us from point A to B. Not one that has airbags for our toes, an in car butler that rolls down the windows, and 50 other things, but no bloody seat belts, power windows, or child locks.

    3. Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 by jacqdesign · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I find it odd that they build such an intensive OS now as well. You would think my mac would be the slow one, but I suppose apple controls the hardware, so they don't sell a machine that runs osx like a dog maybe. But my mac does some neat and pretty things, but seems to do it quickly and without a lot of fuss. Vista, not so much. I think your right on, I'm a java/php/ex asp/vb developer that uses a mac 99% of the time. For the simple fact that I spend a lot less time messing with the computer and a whole lot more using it. Which means more time billable, and less time screwing around. Which is good, cause I need to respond to your post :D

    4. Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, my hatred of vista isn't because of hardware support. For the most part, MS is pretty good about providing support of all the crap you can possibly come up with to plug into your computer. When a new driver API is released, sure, the OEMs have to get off their ass and write new drivers.

      my hatred of vista is based off the fact that there is a ton of stupid crap that is loaded on the OS that does nothing but look cool and slow your machine down. I don't want any fucking Aero-transparent window bullshit. I want an os that is like a formula 1 car: fast as hell and without a single non-essential part.

      Between win 2k and win7(~8 years) the memory footprint of the OS has grown from ~100mb to ~500mb. What real utility do I get for all that? They still have not bought out winzip and winrar and integrated it in the OS, which is way more basic and useful than services to 'detect unused icons on my desktop'. Using ISO images is pretty much an accepted standard these days, and how much support is there for them in vista? But there is a list of idiotic services running as long as your arm on a fresh install of vista. (Fun game, what percentage of them do you actually fully understand what they are doing on/for your system? I'm a professional windows programmer, and I understand perhaps 75%, wtf?)

      No, most people will probably tell you that vista seems to run just fine. MS has spent a lot of time turning their OS into something that is easy and pretty to use. I use the OS for a living. I don't have time to fuck around all day with pretty 'abc block' themes that make the desktop animate windows when they are closed.

      I suspect that a lot of people hate vista for what it isn't as much as for what it is.

      O.o windows has had zip support since 98SE. Why would they need to buyout winzip? WinZip doesn't have any proprietary format. now WinRAR is something worth buying rights to, and 7z, which really needs to be used more since it offers some of the best compression (better than rar and zip).

    5. Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 by Yunzil · · Score: 3, Informative

      my hatred of vista is based off the fact that there is a ton of stupid crap that is loaded on the OS that does nothing but look cool and slow your machine down. I don't want any fucking Aero-transparent window bullshit. I want an os that is like a formula 1 car: fast as hell and without a single non-essential part.

      You realize that Aero doesn't slow your machine down, right? The processing is offloaded to the GPU. Now, if you turn Aero off, then you might see a performance hit.

      Between win 2k and win7(~8 years) the memory footprint of the OS has grown from ~100mb to ~500mb.

      And memory capacities and prices have decreased even faster.

      I use the OS for a living. I don't have time to fuck around all day with pretty 'abc block' themes that make the desktop animate windows when they are closed.

      And yet people keep going on about how great Compiz is.

    6. Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      I don't want any fucking Aero-transparent window bullshit. I want an os that is like a formula 1 car: fast as hell and without a single non-essential part.

      Turn it off then?

      Between win 2k and win7(~8 years) the memory footprint of the OS has grown from ~100mb to ~500mb. What real utility do I get for all that?

      Larger caches resulting in faster startup of larger applications, services which mean less time tracking down files and getting hardware to work, improved APIs to allow developers to write better code, etc..
      Are you one of those morons who thinks their computer is at its fastest/best when it's using none of the memory you paid so much for?

      They still have not bought out winzip and winrar and integrated it in the OS, which is way more basic and useful than services to 'detect unused icons on my desktop'. Using ISO images is pretty much an accepted standard these days, and how much support is there for them in vista?

      So first paragraph "I want nothing except the bare essentials", second paragraph "I want ZIP, RAR and ISO support, which are well supported by 3rd party applications"?
      (And isn't ZIP well supported anyway?)

      I don't have time to fuck around all day with pretty 'abc block' themes that make the desktop animate windows when they are closed.

      Because that's what people who "use the OS for a living" do? "fuck around .. with themes"?

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    7. Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 by thinkloop · · Score: 1

      Uhhh... so turn off the graphics? You can make it exactly like windows 2000 with the click of a button - what kind of programmer are you :p

  44. Way to go! by Lord+Juan · · Score: 0, Troll

    1. Give an insane amount of funding to the military at the expense of diving into more and more debt.
    2. Pay for 744,000 licences of Windows Vista and 744,000 licences of MS Office 2007 instead of invest in a better solution based on freely available OSS which could be contributed back to the people.
    3. ???
    4. Profit! (for MS of course).

    I may actually remove step 3 all together, it does looks like the full profit algorithm (for MS of course).

  45. The terrorist have won. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Communist commissar give you the highest medal for valor over stupid Americans.

  46. Preparing to fight the last war by xs650 · · Score: 1

    More than one senior Army Officer has said that one of the the US Army's biggest problem is that they spend too much time preparing to fight the previous war.

  47. Whu? by flameproof · · Score: 1

    This is a joke, right? No? Really? Wow.

    "Military Intelligence", INDEEEEED!

    On a side note, I wonder just how much Army Salad-Tossing Balmer had to do to get this deal rolling? Pawning off a warped, useless operating system to the gov? Wowsa! That guy's never going to get the tast of anus out of his mouth!

    --
    ~Just as a thing fails if it lacks a kernel, so too it fails if it lacks a skin. ~ Rumi, Discourses
  48. I don't think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what Obama meant by him making a change for the better!

  49. it's only some one else's money by Locutus · · Score: 1

    and is probably considered an economy booster. Dumbass's.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  50. You have pressed the launch button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cancel or Allow?

  51. obligatory.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Change we can believe in?

    Let's see... F-22, dead, due to it being a waste of taxpayer dollars....

    But let's dump taxpayer dollars on Vista...

    I guess Microsoft has better lobbyists than Lockheed Martin?

  52. Re:Dohpes! by jo42 · · Score: 1

    Seriously, there is an Onion article just waiting to happen here...

  53. I hope they've got an exit strategy by childoftv · · Score: 1

    I also wonder if it's compatible with their drivers.

  54. never used anything past windows xp by mcneely.mike · · Score: 1

    I like the idea of freedom, plus the cool little things that users come up with and then implement... one of the cool things is Guake-terminal. Push F12 and i have a drop down console: push F11 and it is 'full screen'. I use it a lot! Does Vista have anything like it? (or osx for that matter... asked a mac user once if it had a console and i got the 'WTF' look). Don't know, just asking. I guess i like the little 'user defined' additions into gnu/linux.

    --
    soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
  55. Re:Yeah, like 7 isn't Vista rebranded with a new t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This may surprise you, but some XP drivers even work with Vista and 7. For example, I have a sound card from 2002 that the vendor has abandoned, isn't writing new drivers for. The driver from July 2002 works fine on Vista and 7.

  56. Who Is In charge? OS Clingkon by CrassIndividual · · Score: 1

    I can't believe these Fing idiots think this is a good idea. Not to sound like a red eyed loon but do you think china is using vista, and if they are they are not paying to use it. I just so happen to have just finished watching the movie Valkyrie. It is about a group of Nazis that try to over through Hitler. They fail. I then turn to the internet and find this fine peace of information. Why the f would anyone running any secure IT deployment ever recommend running vista an office 07. F Guantanamo! What OS is the NSA running? Please tell me it is a Mac. MAcs have no viruses. this will keep my phone secure and my as400 in the clear.

  57. The governments actions are logical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the history of the Windows operating system, the most logical upgrade would be the latest secure system with the largest amount of debugging, including the latest program updates. Hence vista.

  58. Re:yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Russians use Linux, so they figured they'll be incompatible to avoid spying.

    I thought spyware was made by ad companies and spammers!

  59. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  60. Rebuttal by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    You realize that Aero doesn't slow your machine down, right? The processing is offloaded to the GPU. Now, if you turn Aero off, then you might see a performance hit.

    You are sort of correct. It offloads the desktop processing to a .dll that uses the GPU for rendering. You cannot 'turn off' Aero, because it is the rendering engine that is employed, regardless of the complexity of the effects employed by the desktop. You can turn off all the 3d effects to limit the math that the GPU has to crunch.

    Ultimately, not the point though. Why must I turn it off in the first place? The rant's theme was unneeded eye candy. While Aero is in theory a good thing (offloading UI math to a coprocessor), it just means that now the windows UI team will dream up more complex cpu/gpu cycle eating junk to offset the potential gain. Example: the blurry effect that transparent vista windows have is probably generated using pixel shaders.

    And memory capacities and prices have decreased even faster.

    Just because you have an abundance of something doesn't mean that you should waste it. Again, not really complaining about using the memory, but what I am getting for the memory that is being used.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  61. Macs by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    Yeah, Mac seems to be doing it right these days. I wonder if that is just simply because they are working off a *nix codebase and it is just that much better, or because they have people working there that really look at the bottom line of 'the OS must run fast and be good at the basics'. Their jump to *nix was a smart move.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  62. Smart strategy by pmontra · · Score: 1

    It's a way to keep trojan writers locked into an old technology :-)

  63. One step forward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just when we appeared to be getting some common sense in regarded to cybersecurity planning from the US government, they go and take a step backwards by upgrading Windows to Windows....not only Windows but Windows Vista. You can't help buy laugh at how well Microsoft have the US government jumping to their tune. Just when we thought the US military would be re-focused to protecting it's people on a new battlefield, it's gonna spend more time having to protect itself because of the platform chosen by a profit driven corporation. Well done to the Microsoft reps, thanks for putting civilians at risk for a few bucks.

    As has been noted by many people, the political parties are irrelevant, corporate America will always set government policies.

  64. Why does the Army even exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At this point it's safe to ask why the Army even still exists. It's an unconstitutional waste of money, the most expensive jobs training program ever, and a blatant federal attempt to mop up after local school districts by printing money. For all the bitching that Republicans do about the Dept. of Education, they're actually just afraid of the federal money printing presses being diverted from the military's bible-thumping, conservative brain-washing programs to more liberal, hippie academic job-training programs.

    They can't meet recruiting goals, abuse the national guard and other branches, and now they even let foreigners join as well. The only wars we have won in the last forty years have been primarily due to the Air Force (the cold war) and the Navy (the gulf war). The Army only exists to maintain bases in foreign countries and enflame the local populations. Wrap it up, Armailures.

    1. Re:Why does the Army even exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumbass's.

      Beautiful.

  65. Business's need to at least start looking at O.O by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

    Why can't they install Outlook 2007 or whatever but Open Office for the document creation, or at LEAST a side by side install on the machine?
    I'd really like to see this start to happen, over 5 years you could eventually wean users from Office to Open Office, switch them to firefox, you're half way there to beginning the transition.

    I can understand still sticking with Windows, to a point but Office seems crazy to me, the long term costs are incredible.

  66. The future is now! by buttfscking · · Score: 1

    "Grandpa, when did the United States fail as a military super power?" "Well, Johnny, it all began in 2009..."

  67. Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I write some code with "sprintf(store, "%s", buffer)" then this code has a buffer overrun. If I write an OS with that in, the OS is insecure since it has a buffer overrun.

    If I write an OS without that, or with strncopy instead, the OS is more secure.

    Your statement is implying this is not the case.

    It is evidently false.

  68. Need some education on what UAC is? by benjymouse · · Score: 2, Informative

    Even UAC is a bizarre hack of a permissive userland, and doesn't use the kernel's security features.

    If you can get past the idea that UAC is only the UAC prompt you will see that UAC is indeed much more, and that UAC very much so use the kernel's security features.

    Among other things, UAC manipulates the security token of the process, stripping away access rights. This is what is used for both the sandboxing of low integrity processes as well as the elevation prompt.

    Normal processes launched by the user is stripped of admin rights by default. Only if the user is actually an admin and only when he tries to access something which requires those rights will the prompt appear. Confirming the UAC elevation prompt will grant the access rights to the process token.

    Certain processes - such as Google Chrome and Internet Explorer - are launched in low integrity mode. The process token is stripped of even more rights, preventing it from writing to the registry or to the file system except for an isolated region.

    The kernel also ensures that a lower integrity process cannot send messages (or otherwise access) a higher integrity process. So while applications you start on the desktop may send messages to eachother, the IE or Chrome instances cannot send similar messages to desktop apps, even if taken over by an attacker.

    Essentially Vista/7 subdivides the user's account based on what he/she is doing. Surfing the internet: low integrity. Running normal, local applications: Normal integrity. Performing admin tasks: Elevated integrity. Installing new applications: Trusted installer integrity.

    I don't know about you, but this is distinctly a kernel feature in my book. Specifics here: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc138019.aspx

    --
    Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    1. Re:Need some education on what UAC is? by Foolhardy · · Score: 1

      That's mostly right, but I think the kernel's role is a bit smaller.

      Tokens, which identify the access that a process gets, and access checks against kernel objects with security descriptors are indeed handled by the kernel. Integrity levels attached to tokens and mandatory integrity labels are new properties that the kernel allows for tokens and security descriptors and consults during an access check in Vista. That's really the extent of kernel involvement for integrity labels.

      The decision of what to put into a token or security descriptor has always been up to user mode components. Winlogon uses a restricted, medium integrity version of an administrator's token for starting the shell. IE launches a low integrity child process of itself. Certain functions, like Win32's CreateProcess check the image manifest for requestedExecutionLevel and enlist the seclogon service if needed to elevate the new process. The kernel syscall to create a process doesn't do any of this.

      Windows messages are implemented by the Win32 subsystem, not the kernel (even though part of Win32 does run in kernel mode in win32k.sys). The kernel does supply several IPC methods, but not this one. Win32 does the target window integrity check (UIPI).

      I would say that UAC is a user mode construct, mainly implemented in winlogon, kernel32.dll, LSA and the seclogon service. The kernel does enforce restricted tokens and integrity labels for kernel objects though. I can't say that the NT security model has been followed as well as it could be (part of this is due to its complexity), but Vista (and UAC) do use a lot more of it, and seem to have avoided serious security or compatibility problems. One issue is that NT was designed for use on a LAN with trusted programs and the security system was for protecting users and the system from unauthorized users, not from malicious programs. Thus, the owner of a computer is the Administrator, since the system doesn't have anything that user shouldn't have access to. Unfortunately, this doesn't work so well when that admin can't trust all the programs on the system to behave.

  69. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Vista shouldn't be used by military. Who knows if there isn't any "order 66"?

  70. Thinstall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Environments like this where administrative access is locked down, is one place where I like utilities like Thinstall (or now called VMWare ThinApp) where you can put a whole program installation into one file, or one file plus "aliases" to load other features (such as MS Office.) The advantage of Thinstall specifically over other solutions like Symantec's and Microsoft's is that no client is needed for the PCs, just double-click on the executable, and it does the rest.

    Office is one candidate for virtualization, but where this type of virtualization shines are smaller apps and Web browsers. One can virtualize an application like Firefox (or download it from thindownload.com) and anything the app thinks it writes to the Registry is actually written into a folder in the user's home directory. Same with preferences files.

    The downside of VMWare's ThinApp is price. You will be starting at six grand for 50 users and it goes from there. However, for companies and organizations that have to have locked down machines, being able to have packages that users can use that require no installation or any Administrator access at all can make the cost of entry worth it. There are environments out there where any changes done from the default as Administrator have to go through a large number of sign-offs, so having the ability to just have a package that you can point users to that you can update by just dropping a new file in the share directory makes life for that IT department a lot easier.

  71. I glad US army is spending money for such a crap. by alukin · · Score: 1

    I glad US army is spending huge bag of money for such a crap like Vista and necessary massive hardware upgrade. There will be less money for real stuff and less wars around the globe. There will me more holes and more botnets using US army computers. There will be more leaked secrets to Russians and Chinese intelligence. Oh! There will be more military ships "hanging" for days.

    Congratulation, guys! I love Microsoft! :)

  72. I'm not a Microsoft shill and I love Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But that Office 2007 really blew me away and I am sure you would love it too if only give it a try.

    Don't get me wrong. I love Open Office and it is nearest to my heart, but Microsoft really do produce truly wonderful products which you should try.

    Linux; Linux is great and fantastic. But though I hate all things Microsoft, I have to tell you guys, that when I tried Vista, I realised that I would never go back to Linux again... even though I love it very much indeed and don't really like Vista which is much better - try it!

    I'm no Microsoft apologist or anything, and I would never try to undermine anything LInux, but even so, just try Microsoft stuff and I am sure you will love it very much because it is great.

    etc.

  73. DoD Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not just the US Army that is upgrading to Vista. There has been a Department of Defense wide mandate to upgrade to Vista in place for the past 16 months.

    This isn't news.

  74. He said "rarely" Beavis, heh heh heh heh by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

    I found it to be reliable - rarely a crash to be seen

    You Microsoft apologists/shills are funnier than David Letterman. "Reliable" != "rarely crashes".

    1. Re:He said "rarely" Beavis, heh heh heh heh by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Umm.. if my system hasn't crashed in six months and it's only been rebooted twice in that time for updates - that's not reliable?

      What's your definition? It shows up on time to dates?

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    2. Re:He said "rarely" Beavis, heh heh heh heh by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      You Microsoft apologists/shills are funnier than David Letterman. "Reliable" != "rarely crashes".

      Not nearly as funny as the guys suggesting other OSes _don't_ crash.

    3. Re:He said "rarely" Beavis, heh heh heh heh by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      Not nearly as funny as the guys suggesting other OSes _don't_ crash.

      Ford Pinto is a great car. It's quite reliable - it rarely explodes when you have a fender bender.

      This notebook computer is great. It's quite reliable - its batteries rarely explode.

      The MD-11 is quite a reliable aircraft - it rarely crashes while attempting to land.

      Meh.

    4. Re:He said "rarely" Beavis, heh heh heh heh by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      Umm.. if my system hasn't crashed in six months and it's only been rebooted twice in that time for updates - that's not reliable?

      I would say so, yes. I keep XEmacs sessions running longer than that.

      Let me try a car analogy. If your car had two recalls (required software updates) every six months requiring overnight servicing (a reboot), would you consider that reliable?

      What's your definition?

      Solaris is reliable. It's a remarkable event when a server running Solaris requires a reboot or goes down. My desktop Linux box at work is reliable - it has neither required a software update (that forced a reboot) nor has it crashed forcing a reboot in the almost 2 years I've had it.

      Reliable (in an OS) is when a machine reboot of any sort is an utterly catastrophic and totally unexpected event. Two required software updates in six months isn't even close. I've had Unix (of various versions) boxes at home and at work for the last two decades that did better than that.

      And to be fair, I also consider Mac OS X 10.5 to be an utter disaster as far as reliability is concerned (10.4 was more stable). My coworkers migrating to Macs from Microsoft Windows XP have a little different opinion.

    5. Re:He said "rarely" Beavis, heh heh heh heh by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      The computing world is different these days. Any system - including any Linux system and any MacOS system - require reboots on occasion for system updates.

      There's a security flaw in the kernel and you need to patch it, and that means reboots.

      This has nothing to do with reliability. The system will keep on running if you don't apply the security update, so you can choose to run the update or not. You can design your IT environment so reboots won't cause downtime.

      Sure, you have to reboot your Linux system LESS but these days even Solaris is susceptible to the new age of security conscious, immediate updates.

      Yea, in the good 'ol days of Netware 4.11, you could leave that system online forever. But now, everything is connected to the Internet and people are trying a lot harder to break in to your systems. A six-month or yearly update schedule is no longer viable for today's IT systems.

      I remember running NT4 boxes running Exchange 5.0 or 5.5 that would run for a year with no problems. But they weren't connected to the Internet.

      Things are different now.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  75. New Vista error message by Lost+Penguin · · Score: 1

    Do you want to allow the application Chinese hacking?
    Press OK to continue...

    --
    I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
  76. Uptime is not good measure of stability by PleaseFearMe · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of: "Doctor, it hurts when I do this"; "Then don't do that". Uptime is almost meaningless and shouldn't be used as a measure of stability. 1) If I leave my computer on and not touch it, chances are it will stay on for a long time. 2) I assume you browse, game, run Matlab, etc. often so if one such things do not work or break the game, you would have fixed the problem a long time ago. Say Starcraft causes a BSOD, so you find a hack to fix it. Now, every time you run Starcraft, it no longer causes a BSOD. 3) Instead, a better measure of stability is how everything works right after you install the OS, when you are doing things that have potential to cause the OS to crash, such as installing updates, installing software, etc.

  77. Military Intellegence ;^) by rstanley · · Score: 1

    The greatest Oxymoron of all times! (With an emphasis on MORON!) ;^)

    Leave it to the US Military to ignore the problems the UK and France have had with Mickey$oft software installed on their military computers! Of course, the Pentagon has a history of overpriced and inappropriate procurement!

  78. Yes, but when will Windows 7 SP1 be released? by jnork · · Score: 1

    I've heard again and again, from this crowd and others, that you should stay away from a new Microsoft operating system until at least SP1. So what's the point in comparing the Army rollout to the release date of W7? Compare it to the release of W7-SP1.

    Perhaps Military Intelligence isn't entirely an oxymoron.

    --
    Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
    1. Re:Yes, but when will Windows 7 SP1 be released? by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't they just wait for W7-SP1 then, rather than moving to Vista and later moving to W7?

    2. Re:Yes, but when will Windows 7 SP1 be released? by jnork · · Score: 1

      Perhaps. I don't know their reasons for moving to Vista in the first place. Maybe it's because they can't buy XP any more? Any new machines would come pre-loaded with Vista. And so on.

      So given the premise that they feel, for whatever reason, that they need to move on, Vista is available now and W7 isn't, and W7 presumably won't be ready for prime time until SP1.

      Just a guess.

      --
      Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
  79. They will pay for it!! by deblike · · Score: 1

    "While many organizations are preparing for an upgrade to Windows 7, the US Army is upgrading to Windows Vista." Al-Qaeda will provide funds.

  80. but Windows 7 is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    vista sp3

  81. Why? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    According to TFA:

    First-time Vista users will discover added support for data encryption, a new Windows Explorer, upgraded icons and navigation structure. There are also graphical replications of clock, calendar, weather and Outlook mail functions.

    I work for a DoD contractor. I don't think the Army uses windows data encryption, and does not intend to do so. New icons? So what.

    I do not see one good reason that justifies this huge expense.

  82. Re:Yeah, like 7 isn't Vista rebranded with a new t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Even all drivers are compatible"

    And that's a good thing.

  83. What? by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

    "No one cares that it may be 5% slower at foo task when you're running it on hardware that is 500% faster than the gear you replaced."

    Wouldn't that mean that the OS itself is now taking in excess of at least 80% of your system resources?

    (for the humour impaired -- I'm making a literal math joke)

    --
    Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    1. Re:What? by smash · · Score: 1

      lol. i missed a comma :D but i think you know that. touche` :)

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  84. BULLSHIT by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Uptime is a critical criteria for MISSION CRITICAL systems. This should be self explanatory. Starcraft? You are comparing a silly gaming system to a Department of Defense mission critical computing system?

    Reality check, dude. You know nothing of which you speak, and you are polluting the airwaves with drivel.

    I have an idea for you. Push the "OFF" button on the back of your computer. Start measuring your downtime. Let's see if it can stay down for a year, and remain stable. No one gives a damn about uptime, after all. Downtime is a much more important measurement of your frivolous non-producing system.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    1. Re:BULLSHIT by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Uptime is a critical criteria for MISSION CRITICAL systems.

      If the uptime of a single system affects your service availability, then your architecture is broken and cannot deliver 24/7 uptime.

      No-one - who matters, that is - cares about individual system uptime. What matters is whether your services are still available.

    2. Re:BULLSHIT by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      More bullshit. You have a minor point, in that mission critical and/or server systems should be redundant. But, bearing in mind that a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, just how much redundancy do we NEED? With *nix, maybe we need an extra 5 machines per hundred? Your acceptance of constant rebooting helps to ensure that you will need an extra 10 or more machines per hundred.

      But, your response seems rather - out of character, shall we say? You cited one machine, originally, saying that despite rebooting, it is up 24/7, attempting to claim excellent "uptime". I offered a somewhat better definition of "uptime", and now you're making excuses for your machine's poor uptime. Something fishy here......... You don't work for MS FUD department, do you? Maybe not. This seems more like obfuscation, than it seems like FUD.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:BULLSHIT by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      You have a minor point, in that mission critical and/or server systems should be redundant. But, bearing in mind that a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, just how much redundancy do we NEED? With *nix, maybe we need an extra 5 machines per hundred? Your acceptance of constant rebooting helps to ensure that you will need an extra 10 or more machines per hundred.

      You need as many machines as are necessary to provide sufficient performance, plus enough redundancy to carry any failures in the primaries.

      A planned reboot is not a failure. If your architecture cannot sustain scheduled reboots, then it cannot provide 24/7 uptime. This is a fact completely and utterly irrelecant to what OS is being used. If you can't handle a scheduled reboot, then you most certainly cannot handle an unscheduled reboot.

      If you care about individual machine uptimes past swinging your e-dick around, then you shouldn't be involved in trying to maintain high-availability services. In a properly configured and maintained environment, there is no reason for service uptime on Windows vs anything else to be different.

      But, your response seems rather - out of character, shall we say? You cited one machine, originally, saying that despite rebooting, it is up 24/7, attempting to claim excellent "uptime". I offered a somewhat better definition of "uptime", and now you're making excuses for your machine's poor uptime. Something fishy here......... You don't work for MS FUD department, do you? Maybe not. This seems more like obfuscation, than it seems like FUD.

      I am not the person you originally replied to.

  85. Sweet! by crhylove · · Score: 1

    Finally we're leveling the playing field and won't look like international bullies!

    Can Al Quada borrow our "Mission Accomplished" sign?

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
  86. Cmon guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...do the math.

    This is Microsoft's bailout in disguise.

  87. The Right Way to Go by grikdog · · Score: 1

    The Wrong Way to Go

    And the Army Way to Go!

    --
    ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
  88. Re:Yeah, like 7 isn't Vista rebranded with a new t by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Even all drivers are compatible.

    1. Not all.

    2. Quite a few XP drivers worked in Vista, too. There's no need to change the driver API just for the sake of it for every new release, despite what the Linux kernel guys think.

  89. Re:US Army Will Upgrade To Windows Vista by drsmithy · · Score: 1

    Even UAC is a bizarre hack of a permissive userland, and doesn't use the kernel's security features.

    UAC is basically identical to sudo. It's even implemented in a conceptually similar manner (at least as much as the fundamentally different security models allow).

    It's about as secure as Windows 98, thanks to Microsoft's butchery of the userland in the name of backwards compatibility.

    WTF are you on about. UAC is *at least* as secure as sudo, and various other systems for temporarily raising privilege levels.

  90. Wait a minute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Windows 7 was going to be the most secure and most reliable!

  91. woah ..!! by jay_desh9 · · Score: 1

    ha ha ha .. .Kiddin right ?

  92. Curious by dave87656 · · Score: 1

    The Army has tremendous resources at its disposal and a higher need for security than most. Wouldn't it have made sense to move to a BSD-based OS with Open Office? They'd have much more control over the feature-set, much higher security and no license issues. On 744,000 computers the licenses alone would have been 37 million assuming they only paid $50 per computer for Vista. Add the Office licenses on to that.

  93. How? by mahadiga · · Score: 1

    How does US Army know Windows Vista doesn't have wiretaps, back-doors, remote kill switches, etc without verifying its source code?

    --
    I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga
  94. You have no idea by Soulfader · · Score: 1

    I'm the full time admin puke for my National Guard company. Until recently, my main machine was a P4 with 256MB of RAM. I have a new laptop now with XP and Office 2007 (separate rant), so I'm semi-modern.

    But the program I use to put my soldiers in for pay after their proverbial one-weekend-a-month? DOS-based. The program for submitting requests for orders to send them to schools, etc.? It opens in a browser window--some kind of Oracle app server solution--but other than that, looks just like the DOS-based one.

    But hell, it's the National Guard. We just traded in our muskets last year.

  95. So, will Microsoft control attack sequences now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Army to Vista: "Launch attack missles!"
    Vista to Army: "An attempt to launch missles has occured, Cancel or Allow?"

  96. Its your money; Army will spend it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First off I work for the US Army. I don't run Windows at work. I am a die-hard Linux user.

    However the Army is Slow to change. The Army has boat loads of your money to spend on Windows.

    The big hog, now, is share-point since people here can only publish with MS-Office and upload there stuff. It's No Wiki's for these people. Its too hard to use that. And never mind any web stuff, we can contract that out.

    The Army will not change, at least I can retire soon. But I will still be paying for the Government abuse.

    IHMO the money the US could save is much larger then the smaller IT departments that would be needed. If there was a change to open source chairman/department.

    1. Re:Its your money; Army will spend it. by smash · · Score: 1
      They army changing platform would cost them FAR more than the relatively small cost in Windows licenses on new PCs. I get what you're saying, but if you do a proper cost analysis, I'm putting money on the fact that they will SAVE money by sticking with Windows, at least in the short term. I'll bet dollars to gold bars that they have plenty of custom apps that would need to be totally re-written or replaced (and thus debugged and tested before deployment) if they were to switch platform.

      Plus, MS is big enough that if they say "jump" they can be pretty sure that they can formulate an appropriate response rather than just say, declare bankruptcy and go under or whatever.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  97. ROFLMAO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Welcome, the world's newest laughing-stock, the U.S. Army. Holy shit, the institution just got suckered.