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."
Surely it must have occurred to at least a single person at the Pentagon to upgrade to Windows 7 and not to Vista?
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. -
Vista just hit sp2
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.
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.
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.
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?
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...
Yeah, like 7 isn't Vista rebranded with a new taskbar.
Even all drivers are compatible.
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.
I can't believe this is what we pay for
Ubuntu and Open Office would save this country millions of dollars.
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!