Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Military Microsoft Operating Systems Software Windows

US Army Will Upgrade To Windows Vista 374

Posted by Soulskill
from the your-tax-dollars-at-work dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Army Will Upgrade To Windows Vista

Comments Filter:
  • Doh! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Un pobre guey (593801) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:16PM (#28061147) Homepage
    Surely it must have occurred to at least a single person at the Pentagon to upgrade to Windows 7 and not to Vista?
    • Re:Doh! (Score:5, Funny)

      by santax (1541065) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:22PM (#28061209)
      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.
    • Re:Doh! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by houstonbofh (602064) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:31PM (#28061283)
      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.
      • Re:Doh! (Score:4, Funny)

        by Jurily (900488) <jurily@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:10PM (#28061675)

        Look how long it took Vista to get stable.

        Who said it was stable yet?

        • >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.

        • Re:Doh! (Score:5, Informative)

          by SpryGuy (206254) on Friday May 22, 2009 @11:02PM (#28062619)

          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.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Elektroschock (659467)

        They will discover that Software may become a national security risk

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Gerzel (240421) *

          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 n

      • by dslbrian (318993)

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

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by MaskedSlacker (911878)

      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?

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Bigjeff5 (1143585)

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

    • by geekoid (135745)

      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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sortius_nod (1080919)

      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 l

      • by pete6677 (681676)

        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.

  • Free vista! (Score:5, Funny)

    by x2A (858210) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:17PM (#28061149)

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

  • 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.

  • by santax (1541065) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:18PM (#28061159)
    Sono Pazzi Questi Americani.
    • Re:Obelix was right. (Score:5, Informative)

      by NoobixCube (1133473) on Friday May 22, 2009 @10:00PM (#28062001) Journal

      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 :)

  • by cbreaker (561297) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:21PM (#28061181) Journal
    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.
    • by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:30PM (#28061259)

      You need to draw a line somewhere.

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

    • by Maniacal (12626) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:34PM (#28061315)
      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.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by krbvroc1 (725200)

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

        • "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.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Tihstae (86842)

        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?

    • by A beautiful mind (821714) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:38PM (#28061359)
      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.
    • Re: (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

      • by cbreaker (561297) on Friday May 22, 2009 @10:38PM (#28062351) Journal
        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.
    • by Duhavid (677874)

      "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.

      • by cbreaker (561297)
        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 upg
  • by alen (225700) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:21PM (#28061189)

    Vista just hit sp2

    • by pbhj (607776)

      Vista just hit sp2

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

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:28PM (#28061243)

    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.

    • by idiotnot (302133)

      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

      • by trawg (308495) on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:17PM (#28061745) Homepage

        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.

        • 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
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by artor3 (1344997)

        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.

      • by SpryGuy (206254)

        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

    • 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".

      • by belmolis (702863)

        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.

  • no surprise (Score:5, Insightful)

    by smash (1351) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:30PM (#28061261) Homepage Journal
    ... 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.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by idiotnot (302133)

      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, the

      • by pbhj (607776)

        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?

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by SignalFreq (580297)

          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.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      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.

    • 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.

  • Bail out (Score:2, Troll)

    by CSHARP123 (904951)
    Somebody has to bailout Vista. I hope, Army is taking it with pride.
  • I like vista (Score:5, Interesting)

    by alienunknown (1279178) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:35PM (#28061327)
    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.

    • If only because it takes huge, brass balls to say on /. that you like Vista.
    • Oooh! Ow! Ouch! Yikes! Run away! Run away!
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Darkness404 (1287218)
      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 yo
    • h8 vista h8h8h8 (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TiggertheMad (556308) on Friday May 22, 2009 @10:23PM (#28062207) Homepage Journal
      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.
      • Re:h8 vista h8h8h8 (Score:4, Informative)

        by Yunzil (181064) on Saturday May 23, 2009 @02:27AM (#28064185) Homepage

        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.

  • by bensafrickingenius (828123) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:39PM (#28061383)
    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.
    • If you want to see what BO really thinks about the military, see what Tommy [gutenberg.org] has to say about it. It's just as true now as it was when it was written.
    • by SpryGuy (206254)

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

  • by Anonymous Coward

    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.

  • 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 u

  • by fateswarm (590255) on Friday May 22, 2009 @08:55PM (#28061533) Homepage

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

    Even all drivers are compatible.

  • "Upgrade" (Score:3, Funny)

    by CarpetShark (865376) on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:03PM (#28061623)

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

  • 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 [facebook.com] on Facebook! (Original blog post [today.com].) 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!

  • by quonsar (61695) on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:29PM (#28061817) Homepage
    ...this could be dangerous. Are you sure you wish to pull the trigger?
  • by jocknerd (29758) on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:29PM (#28061823)

    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.

    • by Shados (741919)

      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.

  • Cyberwar (Score:5, Funny)

    by gmuslera (3436) on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:32PM (#28061841) Homepage Journal
    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.
  • Military QA (Score:5, Informative)

    by sanosuke001 (640243) on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:32PM (#28061851)
    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.
    • Re:Military QA (Score:5, Interesting)

      by NoobixCube (1133473) on Friday May 22, 2009 @10:18PM (#28062157) Journal

      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.

  • Government waste (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pkbarbiedoll (851110) on Friday May 22, 2009 @09:58PM (#28061987)
    Ubuntu and Open Office would save this country millions of dollars.
  • 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.
  • and is probably considered an economy booster. Dumbass's.

    LoB

The only thing cheaper than hardware is talk.

Working...