British Royal Navy Submarines Now Run Windows 725
meist3r writes "On his Government blog, Microsoft's Ian McKenzie announced today that the Royal Navy was ahead of schedule for switching their nuclear submarines to a customized Microsoft Windows solution dubbed 'Submarine Command System Next Generation (SMCS NG)' which apparently consists of Windows 2000 network servers and XP workstations. In the article, it is claimed that this decision will save UK taxpayers £22m over the next ten years. The installation of the new system apparently took just 18 days on the HMS Vigilant. According to the BAE Systems press release from 2005, the overall cost of the rollout was £24.5m for all eleven nuclear submarines of the Vanguard, Trafalgar and Swiftsure classes. Talk about staying with the sinking ship."
BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
How about this instead? http://www.flickr.com/photos/rowandw/2276721446/ [flickr.com]
Seems more appropriate given the topic.
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Interesting)
And these would be backdoors would be accessed... how? ...underwater wifi?
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
Frogmen DUH!
Just jack into one of the open Ethernet jacks on the outside of the sub!
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Insightful)
2. I see nothing irrational or excessive at all. The US has deliberately sent the Lucetania into a battle zone in order to enter WWI, disregarded intelligence that could have prevented Pearl Harbor, entered a virtual battle in Tonkin to enter Vietnam, and made up stories on WMD to enter Iraq. In that light an NSA backdoor does not seem more preposterous to me. And there have [heise.de] been [cnn.com] news [bbc.co.uk] items [wordpress.com] on this, even from Bruce Schneier [schneier.com].
I think you owe GP an apology for your incorrect accusation.
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Insightful)
Conspiracy theories are comforting because they let people think that world events are under someone's control, even if it is with malicious intent. Unfortunately, the unpleasant truth is that there generally isn't a conspiracy, and world events unfold largely out of control, spurred on by ignorance, incompetence, and general bloody-mindedness.
Not so sane, either. (Score:5, Interesting)
The Lusitania was a Cunard liner.
In 1915 nothing on this Earth could be more British. She was torpedoed just south of Queenstown, Ireland, on May 7, 1915. The ship went down in 18 minutes. 1,195 died, including 123 Americans. The U.S. was a neutral in 1915 and her ports were open to ships of all nations. The Lost Liners - Lusitania [pbs.org] [Robert Ballard, PBS 2000]
That Japan was about to make a move against the U.S. was known.
But where?
The Pearl Harbor attack was a hit and run raid, and, in the end, the attack bought Japan only six months of naval superiority in the Pacific. Pearl, after all, was nothing more or less than a forward naval base. It wasn't where ships were being built or men being trained. It wasn't rubber or oil or other strategic materials. Report Debunks Theory That the U.S. Heard a Coded Warning About Pearl Harbor [nytimes.com] [Dec 6, 2008]
Tonkin didn't feel like a virtual battle to those who fought in it. Anatomy of a crisis [americanheritage.com] [March 2004], What Should We Tell Our Children About Vietnam? [americanheritage.com] [May 1988]
There was - let us say - fair reason to be a tad suspicious about Iraq's abandonment of WMDs:
In 1995, UNSCOM's principal weapons inspector..showed Taha documents...that showed the Iraqi government had just purchased 10 tons of growth medium. Iraq's hospital consumption of growth medium was just 200 kg a year; yet in 1988, Iraq imported 39 tons of it. Shown this evidence by UNSCOM, Taha admitted to the inspectors that she had grown 19,000 litres of botulism toxin; 8,000 litres of anthrax; 2,000 litres of aflatoxins, which can cause liver failure; Clostridium perfringens, a bacterium that can cause gas gangrene; and ricin, a castor-bean derivative which can kill by impeding circulation. She also admitted conducting research into cholera, salmonella, foot and mouth disease, and camel pox, a disease that uses the same growth techniques as smallpox, but which is safer for researchers to work with. It was because of the discovery of Taha's work with camel pox that the U.S. and British intelligence services feared Saddam Hussein may have been planning to weaponize the smallpox virus. Iraq and weapons of mass destruction [wikipedia.org]
_____
* - Spell-checking is built into Firefox and the ieSpell [iespell.com]plug-in has been around for quite some time as well.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
SIGINT antennas? That must be why they are using Windows. On Unix, you could sink the sub with ctrl+c...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft denies that the NSA has access to the _NSAKEY secret key.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
__declspec dllexport pascal WINAPI DWORD NSAAccessFunctionEx(
__in HWnd window,
__in HWnd theOtherWindow,
__in HWnd someHandleToSomethingThatsNotAWindow,
__in DWORD PRRRRRT,
__in const HANDLE SHMWFTPFQ,
__in NSAStructEx* nsastruct,
__in BOOLEAN reallytruly
__in RESV reserved1
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
On my work PC (I don't work in I.T at the moment) the Sysinternal screensaver BSOD was installed as part of the build. Don't ask me why.
I set it as my default screensaver and thought it was a bit of fun, that is until when I was away on a business trip (trying to RDesktop in) and there was no response from my PC.
One of the I.T helpdesk muppets had noticed the BSOD on my monitor, not realised it was a screensaver and took my PC away and reimaged it.
I wasn't happy!
Das Reboot (Score:5, Funny)
Just came here to say "Das Reboot" in a random place.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Nah... It's actually Royal Blue Screen Of Death
Re:BSOD (Score:4, Funny)
We all live on a blue-screened submarine,
A blue-screened submarine,
A blue-screened submarine.
etc.
How deep? (Score:5, Funny)
The last time I drove my car into a lake the windows didn't last past 15 feet. Of course my car is American, and those Brits have that funky metric system, so who knows?
(Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
... those Brits have that funky metric system, so who knows?
(Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week)
Part of the joke? You know, then, the measurement system used in the US is called the English System for a reason, right? OK, just checking.
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Funny)
Actually we call it 'Imperial' units.
Damn colonials are getting uppity again, Ponsenby...
Mark
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not since 1776. Look up the definition of a gallon or a ton.
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's actually a really irritating system we have here in the UK, in school during the 80's we were taught soley in the metric system so I still have no instinctive understanding of what a farenheight, a gallon, a league or a fathom actually are and yet some of these measurements are still pretty much in general use as are pounds, ounces & stones.
In my car I can view my petrol consumption in miles to the gallon or litres to the kilometer but the fuel which goes into the fuel tank is measured in litres and the odometer shows only miles so there is no way to make a simple comparison without having to work out between the two sets of measurements.
I wish the UK would make up it's mind one way or another properly and then stick to it !
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Interesting)
A league is about the distance a healthy man can walk on a good road in one hour. A fathom is about the height of a tall man; it is about eighteen hand widths (fingers closed). A US gallon is the volume of eight pounds of water. An imperial gallon (i.e. the UK gallon) is the volume of ten pounds of water.
One interesting thing about weights. The system of dram/ounce/pound is base 16, which makes division by two a practical measuring operation. Take a pound of something readily dividable, divide it into two equal portions (using a balance scale). Then repeat the process four times. The result is one ounce.
This shows the offsetting virtues of traditional units. While they are difficult to calculate with, they are convenient for measuring things -- especially when it come to quantifying things for sale.
For example, consider length:
1 inch = approximately the width of a thumb
1 hand = 4 inches = width of a hand with fingers closed
1 ft = 3 hands
1 yard = 3 ft
1 fathom = 2 yards
1 rod = 5.5 yards = length of ox goad
1 chain = 22 yards = 100 links in standard survey chain
1 furlong = 10 chains = distance ox team can plow without rest
1 mile = 880 fathoms
Notice that if you lay out a square field such that an ox team can plow one furrow across then rest, you get a square with sides of exactly one furlong or 660 ft. The area of that field 43,600 square feet, which is nearly exactly one acre (43,560 ft).
For purposes of round measurement (no fractions), such as you would use in commerce, traditional measurement is far more convenient. If I'm buying liquor, the following units exhaust all the practical measures to which I might wish to round a purchase:
1 mouthful
1 jigger (aka 1 fluid ounce) = 2 mouthfuls
1 jack = 2 jiggers
1 gill = 2 jacks = 4 jiggers
1 cup = 2 gills = 8 jiggers = 16 mouthfuls
1 pint = 2 cups
1 quart = 2 pints = 4 cups
1 gallon = 4 quarts = 8 pints = 16 cups
1 cask = 16 gallons
1 barrel = 2 casks
1 hogshead = 2 barrels
1 butt = 2 hogsheads = 4 barrels
1 tun = 2 butts = 4 hogsheads = 8 barrels
In such a system of measurement, you never, ever have to deal with fractions. Breaking down into smaller units is simply a matter of dividing a whole into two equal parts. So if you want to buy things without having to specify fractions, traditional units are the bee's knees (equal to 1 / 128 of an inch ... no just kidding). That's not so important in a world with calculators -- you just calculate a unit price.
Still, if you want to buy eight feet, three inches of rope, you can measure out twenty-four hands and three thumbs and come rather close.
Re:How deep? (Score:4, Informative)
Notice that if you lay out a square field such that an ox team can plow one furrow across then rest, you get a square with sides of exactly one furlong or 660 ft. The area of that field 43,600 square feet, which is nearly exactly one acre (43,560 ft).
Sorry, but that's off by a factor of ten. A traditional farmers acre is indeed 660 feet long, but only 66 feet wide. (That is, one furlong by one chain). A furlong square field would be ten acres.
Long, narrow fields allow the farmer to plow the field with the minimum number of turns. Turning an ox team around is not quite as easy as you might expect.
The same reason for long-narrow fields still applies to tractors, which also take time to turn. Of course, tractors do not need to rest, so the fields can be longer. Fields of a mile or more in length or not uncommon in the US and Canada.
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Informative)
The real failure here is in not teaching graspable examples and estimates.
For everyday tasks, simple but rough conversions convey a lot more understanding than tables of four-digit factors. And so here it is, from a native metric user who has had to parse some imperial in his time, unsuitable for exacrt measurements, but helps you understand your world:
The rough imperial/metric survival guide
Basic equivalences:
* A litre and a quart is roughly the same
* A yard and a meter is roughly the same
* A imperial ton and a metric tonne (1000kg) are almost exactly the same.
Rules of thumb:
* A US quart is almost one liter.
* A UK quart is a bit more than a liter.
=> a pint is about half a liter a liter is about 2 pints
=> a gallon is about 4 litres
=> a cup is about a quarter liter
* A pound is almost half a kilo
* A stone is just over 6 kilos
* An ounce of weight (any kinds) is almost 30 grams
=> there are about 35 ounces in a kilo
=> 100grams is between 3 and 4 ounces.
* A CD is 12cm wide
* The hole in the CD can contain a 1cm square
* A foot is about 30cm. A metric desk ruler is typically 30cm long.
=> an inch is about 2.5cm.
=> 10cm is about 4 inces
=> 1m is about 40inches
* A yard is about a meter
=> There are about 3 feet to a meter
=> A fathom is almost 2 meters
* An imperial mile is about one and a half kilometer
* A league is almost exactly 5555m.
* A league is roughly five and a half kilometers
* For typical oven temereatures Fahrenheit is roughly Celsius * 2
This is less than 10% off from 150C through 300C, but possibly not exact
enough for sensitive baked goods.
* For typical weather temperatures, don't even bother beyond some selcted
datapoints, choose the ones you feel are handy:
F and C equal. Awfully, fiercely cold weather, but can be found:
-40F = -40C
Temperature of a good home freezer. Skiing starts getting chilly:
0F = -18C
Reliably thaw-free. Lasting good skiing conditions:
25F = -4C
Water freezes/melts:
32F = 0C
Maximum density of water, commonly the temp of water below the ice:
39F = 4C
Standard "room temperature" in chemistry. A bit too cold for T-shirts though.
68F = 20C
Perfect balmy weather IMO, but then I am a northerner:
77F = 25C
Body temperature, or bloody hot weather:
100F = 37C
I can't really grasp how far a kilometre or mile is
If you do any walking, running, or cycling: measure your most common route on
a map in kilometers or miles, that should give you a very intuitive scale on
those.
And remember: Google is your friend! You can type straight in stuff like:
"2.4 us pints in l"
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Funny)
...I know a pint...
Ah, a fine university education at work.
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry, but that is clearly a fail, not a fine (british) university education.
It's _pints_. Plural. Always.
Re:How deep? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Irish changed all their signs and speed limits to km and km/h from miles and mph a couple of years ago - a big project, granted, but certainly not 'crazily hard' - it should have been done in the seventies
I'm in my late forties and constantly pull much younger people up for using imperial units - what is the problem? Is it just some strange Al Murray / Pub Landlord sense of 'We're British, so f**k you!'? Spirits are sold in ml, bottled beers are sold in ml and yet it's vitally important not to lose the sacrosanct pint for draught beer - utter bullshit.
The UK needs people who care about a consistent system of measurement to start making as much noise as the Little Englanders
Re:How deep? (Score:4, Insightful)
The UK needs people who care about a consistent system of measurement
why? doesn't the current system work? I've never had problems buying stuff whether its a pint, a litre of milk or worrying whether I've put 3 or 4 gallons in my car when its measured out in litres - it just doesn't matter, I fill it up and if I want to see how far I've gone it'll tell me - in the universally recognised mpg. In my granny's time, she had no problem whatsoever working in pounds, shillings and pence. And she could add up in her head - something cash tellers today have great difficulty with.
The reason its working fine as is is the same reason English is still used as a language instead of Latin or Esperanto. The latter may be technically 'better' but everyone can make subtle and amusing word plays and still understand what you mean. It may be more confusing and have some unusual constructs, but that doesn't matter. I think those are what makes the world work for humans, its only the soulless who think that art is meaningless, that all measurements should be in a base ten, that we should go with swatch time. The world would be such a dull, geeky place if these people had their way.
I doubt its an Al Murray-esque entrenchment of views, more likely an understanding that it isn't broken, so fixing it would only cost lots for no real benefit, and just annoy everybody.
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Funny)
"Launch the Nukes", "Sir yes sir", "Sir I have clicked the button, however it is now prompting me 'Are you sure you really want to launch Nuke?'"
*Presses YES*
"But are you really really really sure?"
*Presses YES again*
"Do you want windows to remember this choice in future?"
*Presses NO*
*paperclip appears*
"Would you like help 'Launching Nuke'?"
*Presses No*
*Walks to the main hatch in dispair*
*Opens main hatch while 100' below the surface using manual leaver to avoid that damn paperclip*
Re:How deep? (Score:5, Interesting)
They used to use the English system in the UK, and then the rest of the world caught up with them and they converted to metric. Right now, the countries not using the metric system are: Myanmar, The United States, and Liberia.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Couple of things:
1. We don't call it the English System, we call it the Imperial System.
2. It should be called the British system if you're going to call it anything.
3. It's not the same anyway because your pints are smaller.
4. No one here uses Fahrenheit ( what a quintessentially English name!) any more, except the Daily Mail and we like to pretend they don't exist.
5. Most things are metric now anyway.
But apart from that, please go on calling it the English System. It's not at all confusing.
Obvious reason (Score:5, Funny)
The navy liked their version of minesweeper best.
Re:Obvious reason (Score:4, Funny)
Nevermind the Minesweeper, i hear it runs all variants of Code Red [wikipedia.org] with no installation hassles too.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
it sounds like you are a real minesweeper consultant. are you a solitaire expert as well?
Re:Obvious reason (Score:4, Funny)
Ah so your irish!
Learning from prior mistakes (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:5, Funny)
They did indeed learn from past mistakes and are remarkably forward-thinking. They made a boat that was doomed to fail miserably, named it the Titanic, and said it was unsinkable. Many years later there was a movie made about it that was a box-office smash hit. They're now seeding an even bigger future movie by making certain that ALL their boats will sink.
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:5, Funny)
> ... making certain that ALL their boats will sink
These boats are submarines. They'd be broken if they _didn't_ sink.
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:4, Interesting)
So, how does one tow a submarine?
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:5, Insightful)
Didn't the Brits hear about what happened to the USS Yorktown [wikipedia.org] when they tried Windows as a naval solution. God save the Queen, please.
Perhaps the Brits are smart enough to put user input validation into their applications ?
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:5, Insightful)
Your suggestion could be interpreted that Microsoft was not to blame on the Yorktown debacle, which is wrong.
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:5, Insightful)
Not having input validation on a userland application should NEVER be the reason a whole OS goes belly-up.
Indeed.
Your suggestion could be interpreted that Microsoft was not to blame on the Yorktown debacle, which is wrong.
They weren't. The application crashed, not the OS. It is trivial to demonstrate that Windows NT can handle a userspace application dividing-by-zero, you just use Calculator.
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Learning from prior mistakes (Score:5, Funny)
So, the USS Yorktown was an actual real life fail boat?
Won't work (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Next generation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's mature and stable by now - unlike any newer MS server OS.
Classic title! (Score:4, Funny)
From "Das Boot" to "ReBoot".
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Saving the tax payer £22 mil (Score:5, Informative)
Summary fails to mention, and sort of implies the opposite; The cost saving is down to using off the shelf hardware, not switching to windows.
First informative post... mod parent up. (Score:5, Insightful)
20 posts before the first one that actually provides useful information.
Is that a typical ratio on slashdot? I haven't been keeping track.
Re:First informative post... mod parent up. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, normally it's worse, but this time the title includes Windows - so brace yourself for a flood of cliches.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
On the OS side they will have problems as well. The version of windows they deploy will eventually reach end of life. If they deployed on a Free OS they (supplier or customer) would have been able to maintain it themse
Here's where the real savings are (Score:5, Funny)
Windows made the submarines on-the-shelf hardware, they'll be sitting pretty on some reef shelf in no time.
Mr. Malda, I'm submitting the news article for 2009-01-19 ahead of time:
Microsoft's Ian McKenzie announced today that the entire Royal Navy Nuclear Submarine fleet had sunk due to a Windows buffer overflow. HMS Vigilant's captain, Commander Bob Anstey, said: "I heard my 1st officer shouting 'Captain, Be SOD, Overflow!', so I yelled at him: 'Get the caulking guns ready, you SOD!' and he just gave me a blank stare and said: 'We cannot caulk this one, sir! Vigilant's a goner!' Well, bugger me!"
In other news:
HMS Vigilant's captain, Commander Bob Anstey allegedly accidentally fired a nuclear missile at Redmond, Washington in an attempt to complete the Windows Activation of the newly installed 'Submarine Command System Next Generation' customized Windows XP system. "It was a bug, yes, that's it. Some kind of unfortunate bug triggered the 19-step launch sequence," said Commander Anstey. Nobody at or near Microsoft could be reached for a comment.
Re:Saving the tax payer £22 mil (Score:5, Informative)
Was custom built hardware running Ada86 custom software
Then Mixture of SPARC's running Custom Solaris system, and custom hardware, and the same Ada software
Now some off the shelf hardware (PC's) running custom version of Windows somewhere between Win2k and XP?
N.B. The Sonar system however run Linux ....
HMS Bob (Score:5, Funny)
HMS Bob: "Das Not Boot."
other news (Score:5, Funny)
Wolfgang Petersen is reportedly preparing to make "Das Reboot", a (very) short sequel.
I would have thought the military would want Open (Score:3, Insightful)
Source for obvious reasons. I know the Brits and Americans are friends, but still, running an OS that is doing Bill-knows-what doesn't sound very secure in many ways (Would you want the US military running a closed source Red Hat Linux sight unseen?). Even if there is no backdoors/spying, the ability to compile the source and see what it is doing at every step will have benefits in the future, to look for holes previously unknown, to see what it is doing every step of the way, or to graft new abilities into it.
Linux/BSD/whatever. In fact, I'm wondering why corporations run MS now, considering all this.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> to look for holes previously unknown
especially valid remark in a submarine, IMHO...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Source for obvious reasons. I know the Brits and Americans are friends, but still, running an OS that is doing Bill-knows-what doesn't sound very secure in many ways (Would you want the US military running a closed source Red Hat Linux sight unseen?). Even if there is no backdoors/spying, the ability to compile the source and see what it is doing at every step will have benefits in the future, to look for holes previously unknown, to see what it is doing every step of the way, or to graft new abilities int
Re:I would have thought the military would want Op (Score:4, Informative)
Microsoft do have source sharing programs with some partners. This sort of project would be one example of that.
The reason the Windows 2000 source code got leaked a few years back is not because of lack of security at Microsoft itself but because a partner leaked it.
Even Microsoft realises that the source code needs to be available for some projects and they have a choice of either allowing just that or losing some of the most high paying contracts.
Re:I would have thought the military would want Op (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but even if the source is provided, it does raise some questions:
-does the navy just accept the source, but not compile it as the final product, taking the binary as-is or compiled by Microsoft?, essentially nixing the open sourcing security benefts in the first place
-do they have to compile it with Visual Studio? or any x86 compiler will do?
I believe Ken Thompson himself installed a compiler (relatively benign) trojan that survived many years without detection. And this:
http://books.google.com/books?id=bv2n6o_6LaQC&pg=PA378&lpg=PA378&dq=%22ken+thompson%22+compiler+trojan&source=bl&ots=c-sXYKAlKw&sig=nhoa4LVar3Y3j2aLmcqqtAoxjFo&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result [google.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If not, this is not security, this is security theater, which is far worse than no security at all.
Sometimes, I just switch it off and on again... (Score:4, Funny)
That'll explain this recent Royal Navy advert.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=aDHPCr5m4ko [youtube.com]
The subs the least of our problems (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The subs the least of our problems (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yeah? How about "The USAF accidentally dropped a nuclear bomb in Redmond, WA that fortunately didn't explode, but damaged the building of famous Windows OS maker Microsoft, instantly crushing CEO Steve Ballmer and the entire marketing team into a pulp."
Feel better now?
Re:The subs the least of our problems (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why isn't there a +1 Terrifying?
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
I am relieved! (Score:5, Funny)
Now I can sleep safer knowing that if the Brits are about to launch a nuclear missile from a submarine and start WWIII, a UAC window will pop up asking if they are sure about it.
Re:I am relieved! (Score:5, Funny)
Clippy (Score:5, Funny)
And the scary thing is.. (Score:5, Interesting)
.. British Navy submarine captains are the only officers worldwide (as of the mid 90s or so) to have the independent right to launch nuclear missiles if they lose contact with the Admiralty.
Not quite true (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And the scary thing is.. (Score:5, Interesting)
All our missile subs carry sealed, hand-written orders from the prime minister as to whether to retaliate with nukes in the event that Britain is the target of a first strike. The orders are destroyed once the prime minister leaves office and few have ever revealed which way they decided.
It is, apparently, one of their first tasks upon taking office.
See this report from The Today Programme [bbc.co.uk]
wellington said it best (Score:3, Funny)
'I don't know if they frighten the enemy, but they scare the hell out of me.'
at least they're up front about it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDHPCr5m4ko [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
First, Wellington wasn't in the Navy.
as any fan of blackadder would know. :-)
wellington:The men had a whip-round and got you this. Well, what I mean is I had the men roundly whipped until they got you this. It's a cigarillo case engraved with the regimental crest of two crossed dead Frenchmen, emblazoned on a mound of dead Frenchmen motif. - some of the funniest words ever on tv.
rather i saw it as an english officer talking of those that were supposed to be supporting him.
Second, he said it of Spanish of
what do you want to do? (Score:5, Funny)
Not a nice environment to work in (Score:5, Funny)
Now think about a corporate drone using Windows. Your desktop is locked down, updates are rolled out by IT. If your machine is taken over by an IE exploit, the Exchange server fails, etc. etc., there is nothing you can do about it.
Conclusion: Windows is the appropriate operating system for submarines.
Actually, this fits in quite nicely... (Score:5, Insightful)
With the Royal Navy's recruitment advert for IT crew where the guy goes on about how complex the equipment is and then finishes the advert with the punch line "but sometimes, I just switch it off and back on again".
Perhaps this is why it's saved tax payers £22 million too, we no longer need high paid IT staff with a clue what they're doing, we can just get 16 year old school drop outs who IT qualifications are that they built their own PC and set up an internet on uncle Joes computer by sticking the AOL disc in. I mean, hey the nuclear missile launch console has failed to fire off our nuclear deterrent after Russia just obliterated Europe in a nuclear attack, just reinstall Windows and make sure you stick the latest nuclear weapons launch drivers on, if not just pop round to the local PC World store and get the Tech Guys (UK equivalent of Geek Squad) to fix it for £125.
I can sleep comfortably knowing that our nuclear deterrent is in safe hands.
Secure software (Score:4, Interesting)
She worked in some high security, underground place with thick steel doors (did she? well either she told me that or it's my imagination again...) and they showed them videos of what happened when they made mistakes: everyone drowns... or the submarine gets crushed by pressure, or whatever, depending on the bug. I don't think accidentally releasing nukes was one of the scenarios though...
Maybe they should show the microsoft programmers some of those videos.
It's Blue!!! It's Blue!!! (Score:4, Funny)
In the great coordinate plain of life, we seem to have a situation where the line tracing British IQ and the line tracing the mortality of the human race are getting perilously close. I've always taken comfort in the fact that mouth breathers and knuckle draggers seemed to remain alive almost in spite of their gross stupidity. Now a bunch of twits from the dept. of silly walks decides that the most expedient means of managing a nuclear force is with an operating system whose answer to digital indigestion is at best rebooting and at worst reinstallation. I can only imagine how that might impact (and I use the word "IMPACT" in all it's most unpleasant possible meanings) a critical nuclear encounter.
Some additional new possible acronyms;
DBSD ----- Deep Blue Sea of Death
BGAD ----- Blue Glass Ashtray of Death
RBGD ----- Radioactive Blue Glow of Death
BSOA ----- Blue Screen of Armageddon
O-SHT ---- The Missile Ranger is Turning Blue Because Windows Has Wedged and He Can't Abort the Missile Launch!!!
Useful on a sub (Score:5, Funny)
See, this is actually an elegant solution, as the bloat will act as a redundant buoyancy system in case of the inevitable blue-screen crush.
"18 Days" (Score:3, Interesting)
I think they mean that the sub was incapacitated for 18 days while a transition plan was executed.
If it really took 18 days, they wouldn't be installing Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
It is mysterious to me as to why they would use Windows. I'd also love to know what is being commanded with the system? Is it just the Naval IT? e.g, sending encrypted email, accessing charts, documentation etc, crew communications, hiding pornography, printing happy birthday banners? I doubt it is controlling ballast tanks and dive planes and I can't imagine it controlling reactor or launch functions.
And if it's just the case of internal email and minesweeper games, isn't 18 days a long time? Especially if MS decided not to include hardware transition work and training in those numbers?
What were they using before that it was so expensive?
How can 8 years of evaluation time possibly save the military 22M pounds per year?
Meh. I guess it's on MSDN, so it's going to be a *little* biased. Kudos to the MS sales team. Good job, don't know how you did it.
Re:"18 Days" (Score:5, Funny)
It didn't take 18 days to install windows. It took 18 days to re-cable the whole submarine with an ethernet network, replace all the computers, AND install windows. I'd like to see you rewire a submarine in that time...
I can't believe I just defended the military.
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Genuine advantage... (Score:3, Funny)
Sinking ship? (Score:5, Funny)
Windows Security Certification (Score:5, Funny)
In Soviet Russia (Score:4, Funny)
Are Microsofties REALLY that confident? (Score:3, Funny)
I would love to see a group of 100 Microsoft executives taken down thousands of feet under the ocean's surface and then informed that the entire vessel is run under a Microsoft Windows operating network. With bio-monitoring devices attached to each of them, I have to wonder how many of them would not cringe at the news that their safety was in the hands of their "no longer supported" operating systems.
I am not sure how we could work Samuel L Jackson into this plot, but it would make a pretty funny movie, I think. "Das-Reboot"
Keep Linux out of defense (Score:5, Interesting)
Given the fact that Linux is built mostly by anonymous contributors, kept on servers which are hacked every now and then (Fedora Signing Key Server Hacked in August - Red Hat Infrastructure Servers recently Hacked, Cracked & Compromised) what guarantee is there that Linux - God's gift to nerds - doesn't contain sleeping trojans written by Russians or Chinese ?
Do the math: what would it cost to accomplish this? I think something like less than 10.000$ (including paycheck, laptop and broadband connection).
Re:Keep Linux out of defense (Score:4, Insightful)
I'll bite.
The guarantee comes from the fact that hundreds of people review the kernel sources every day, and the fact that only trusted code is committed to the official (Linus/Andrew Morton, et al) repository(s)
You're free to run anyone's distribution as you wish, so of course you might mistakenly download one with 'sleeping trojans', but I doubt the Navy would.
You would do well to be more concerned about using software from a company who refuses to allow you to review their source code. I'll leave it to you to figure out who that might be.
Clippy says... (Score:3, Funny)
...it looks like you're trying to fire a torpedo. What would you like to do?
Re:save UK taxpayers 22m? (Score:5, Funny)
Don't you mean gnuke? :)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)