While a good number of its machines are already running the OS -- about 13 percent at this point -- the United States Army has mandated that before the clock strikes midnight on December 31st, 2009 that all of its Windows-powered computers must switch from XP to Vista,
presumably and hopefully with Service Pack 2. Additionally, all Office 2003 users will have to upgrade to the 2007 variant, but thankfully, someone with
a little Vista experience made sure to omit standalone weapons systems from the mandate -- you know, because there's not really time to click through eight confirmation boxes when launching a time-sensitive homing missile. All jesting aside, we're flummoxed that the Army didn't just wait for
Windows 7 to roll out in a few months before making this decision, but hey, what's a few more billion in upgrade costs next year, right?
[Via
HotHardware]
posted May 23rd 2009 3:01PM
Another MS post?
Another useless comment?
why thank you.
oh no they posted about something other than apple!! this place is going down hill, its like they are turning into a tech blog instead of a apple blog!
I'm surprised they haven't posted that the sensor bar is real and will be at E3. I sent the tip in early yesterday (with some other details, but you guys can wait for the article). My friend will be at the booth. Lucky people.
C'mon, this argument starts in every single post regarding either Microsoft or Apple. It's wasted thread real estate.
Apple blog, MS blog... both are news, long live Engadget! :P
You would think the Army is smart enough to deploy their own OS.
Ohs Noes....another Vista hate post from Engadget. It's the worst OS EVAR!!! ZOMG......
Get over yourselves. Vista post SP1 has been great, provided you're not running on hardware that was made in 1991
Why not just wait for Windows 7 like everyone else is doing?
OK, soldiers. I'd like to introduce our newest commanding officer. He'll be leading the troops into the next battle. Give a snappy salute to.... Major Fail (aka Hasta la VISTA).
I sure hope the U.S. Army doesn't have to depend on this crappy OS to fight any major battles or they'll be sending for extra body bags. Even the corporations don't want to upgrade and yet they're staking human lives on this already outdated OS. The Army had better have some heavy duty computers to run this bloated, processor-sucking OS. Otherwise, those underpowered computers will be puking their guts all over the battlefield like an enemy recruit facing a Blackhawk Chaingun.
Silly Army!
They should switch to Mac OS or their own OS, to keep it more secure.
Silly army indeed.
@Greg, it seems many people miss point that the Army has also bunch of plain solitaire-playing bureaucrats.
Upgrade of previous MS stack to new MS stack on bureaucrat's PCs doesn't mean that they suddenly put Windows onto mil-grade systems. And even then, "military grade" generally refers to hardware. OS can be pretty much any crap, since it is rarely (if ever) connected to Internet/whatever. (Though normally real-time OSs are used and Windows is far from being anything real-time).
@Greg -
The Military uses computers for more than just dicking around on the internet, so Mac OS wouldn't suffice.
I speak from experience - 10 years AF.
@Greg
Yes because last time I checked, the Army was looking for ways to dazzle their intelligence briefings with Keynote
Now everytime they want to fire a missile, the UAC will ask them "Are you sure you want to fire a missle?".
@ greg
Yeah, ur right.
As a matter of fact, they should just kick the bucket on any OS's and just upgrade to the new Shuffles!
I read once, the IT gurus in the Army said that they preferred Windows because MAC OS security problems are more severe than those that exist in Windows.
It's more of a troubleshooting thing than anything else; they need to start upgrading now before Microsoft stops supporting XP.
ummm the goverment can pay for support till 2014 -.-'
This is true, Microsoft will stop supporting XP even for the DoD.
ZOMG! Intelligent post!?
why would army want vista?
Because it's a more secure OS than XP. That's what this is all about.
AJ is correct.
And the reaosn they did not select 7 is that, while all early tests indicate it will be better, it does not have 2.5 years under its belt yet.
And note they said "all their WINDOWS PCs" not all their PCs. They do use *nix variants for a lot of things.
even though there are annoying UAC prompts, it is ttill a safer alternative to a new OS (7).
If annoying means more secure and safer than why not? After all security is an issue more often exploited through the users, especially with their lame ass name passwords.
"It's wasted thread real estate"
Don't worry. Waste enough thread real estate and the government will be forced to bail it out. If if they can afford to bail out the banks and migrate to Vista just as Windows 7 comes out, then threads should be no problem.
It would be easier migrating from Vista to 7 than from XP to 7. Obviously they didn't choose Windows 7 because it's not even out yet. =D However, Windows 7 is pretty much an optimized Vista under the hood, so one can say it is as proven as Vista can ever be.
What a waste of resources.... One might say Vista and the US Army have a lot in common.
"even though there are annoying UAC prompts, it is ttill a safer alternative to a new OS"
GOOD GOD ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS? Another person who hasn't figured out the THREE CLICKS necessary to turn that off in the YEARS since Vista released?! The horse is dead!
Kamokazi is correct. I'm in Field Artillery and for the systems we use to direct the artillery are unix-based. Most computer systems that really need the security have a unix-based OS.
"Because it's a more secure OS than XP. That's what this is all about."
While true, wouldn't the army want to have their own OS?
Why would anyone want to use Vista? XP is a decent enough OS and Windows 7 isn't far off.
@ Kyle " Most computer systems that really need the security have a unix-based OS." Like the Macs? Or are there any other UNIX based OS?
And at the article, " you know, because there's not really time to click through eight confirmation boxes when launching a time-sensitive homing missile. " Ha ha lmao
@pika-True, but there are still changes, which are still 'unknowns',
@Patriks-Do you have any idea how much money would be wasted on that?
@Asha-Vista has much better security than XP. In fact, that's the pain reason people don't like it...all that new security causes lots of little nusiances
@sk8-Erm...how about just Unix itself? I was implying that they probably use a combination of Unix, Linux, BSD, etc. No OS has to be 'based' on it...it can run by itself. What he probably means is the shell and UI they created for it is based on Unix. Heck, you could even argue that OSX isn't even an indepentent operating system...it's just a VERY elaborate shell for Unix :-)
Yup, more secure! I have 3 Vista running since early Vista Beta (it was painfully in the beginning) and none of them have Antivirus installed. Just keep updates on, UAC on, get latest drivers and run malicious removal tool every month and it runs like butta. I would even say that Vista is more secure than Window 7 because Vista doesn't allow user to set UAC security level...its always high.
Vista: the refuge of 'those' people.
@AJ
Umm... The army was given a super secure version of XP which is waay different than the one the rest of us know. Security was not the reason it was rejected, driver signing was.
http://www.annoyances.org/exec/show/article09-203
http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/01/air-force-now-using-super-secure-version-of-windows-xp/
"@Patriks-Do you have any idea how much money would be wasted on that?"
Maybe stop wasting so much money into pointless research? I believe that the US army has the biggest spending, greater than all the other countries combined.
@IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII (BarCODE) :
What is enforced driver signing if not 'security'? It's not like the Army is running a whole lot of nonstandard hardware on their generic, internet facing PCs; they don't need any custom drivers. Enforced driver signing along with UAC (presumably the user accounts will be set up so they can't turn this off) will/should prevent 'bad guy' rootkit installations. Either through phishing email or browser exploit.
"why would army want vista?"
Because military men are suckers for punishment.
I'm in the US Army, proudly serving in Afghanistan (albeit at a desk job for the time being). I look forward to the upgrade to Vista, and at the same time I dread it. I knew it was coming ever since the OS came out. The Army can't rely on XP forever! It has to make a switch to something sooner or later. I was kinda hoping for a commissioned version of Linux...
After several years of working with US Army equipment, I can tell you that most everything that isn't a PC sitting on a desk in an office (homing missile controllers, etc) are almost all Unix/Linux (some Red Hat). Of the PC's sitting on desks, all of them run Windows, because that's the only thing the Signal guys will support, and that's what you have to be running to be on the Network.
I really don't think all of our computers are Vista-capable. The newer are, sure. They are very capable. However, some units (National Guard comes to mind) use old, out-dated piece-of-crap computers that don't meet the specs. If those computers will be required to switch to Vista, they will also be required to be replaced by new machines.
I also dread the switch because. frankly, there are a lot of idiots in the Army. It took some senior non-commissioned officers 8 years to learn XP, now they are basically starting all over with Vista! God help them when they have to ask the young officers how to open an Office 2007 document!
Just couldn't wait for Windows 7?
Yeah, me neither. Come on Big M.
This just makes it even easier for SkyNet to take over now....the end is near....
Not if UAC has anything to say about it!
Dumbest thing ever. I've not even seen a NSA guide to secure Vista yet; but there were ones for XP, Win2k Server, Win2k3 Server... but Vista? Meh.
Guess they're trying to be "secure" via obscurity.
@gerbick
Ok, I haven't tried it, but it seems that the name says it all!
http://www.nsa.gov/ia/guidance/security_configuration_guides/operating_systems.shtml#microsoft
Can't you read or search?
The NSA won't come to your house or send you letters telling you that they have a guide ready! LOOOOL
lol. I guess the word "yet" escaped you somehow.
Simply put, there's been no request for it because most agencies didn't like Vista.
Upgrading OS is a difficult choice and someone made that decision: use Vista, not Linux or any free OS. I guess its a really hard job - spending billions of budget dollars...
Huh? I was sure I pressed that "undo" button...
@ Shinigami: In the business world, there's no such thing as a "free OS."
Yes, perhaps Linux is free to "purchase," but don't forget about support. No company would be caught dead without a support agreement, the likes of which cost on average the same or more than a Microsoft support agreement.
Also, let's not forget the in-house support. Linux-savvy IT staff typically earn more than Windows-savvy IT staff. Windows is also a more familiar interface to virtually everyone that works there. Throwing Linux into the mix will confuse and frighten the end-user population, increasing the amount of necessary Linux-savvy IT support staff, and increasing end-user dowtime. In the business world, the old cliche is true: time is money. Time people aren't working is time the company is losing money.
In short, no one who has ever held a real job in IT would ever say something as idiotic as "Linux is free." Windows is a cheaper OS for most companies to deploy and use. It's a little concept we like to call "TCO," or "Total Cost of Ownership."
(P.S. Don't bother claiming you've held a real job in IT; the only thing you will prove by doing so is how easy it is to lie on the Internets.)
I really don't understand why everyone is so anal about Vista, it really isn't that bad :\ I prefer it over xp any day.
You're right. It's just that the people writing these kind of articles aren't familiar with the bureaucratic way large corporations - including the armed services - work. Refresh cycles are planned three to five years ahead and work on the licensing agreements in place. That's why 50% corporate penetration wasn't achieved by XP until four years after release.
Vista is now proven, debugged and dependable. W7 is, as yet, as unknown quantity. Expect Vista's OS share to continue to increase over the next couple of years and the usual ignoramuses to proclaim W7 as a failure because it doesn't capture 50% market share in a year.
Those of us who actually know how billing cycles work will just shake our heads as usual.
Exactly - Vista had problems when it came out, but now they are 99% fixed. The other 1% aren't major either, and no OS is perfect.
People need to realise that its 2009, and it's a perfectly fine operating system.
And for everyone who complains its a resource hog, it is. It's also another hint that you need a new computer.
Agreed, after a few years of these comments its really starting to piss me off, i've been using vista for nearly half a year now and its been fine, snappier than xp aswel (much better pc though, upgrades and all) but it does not seem to have that slow down xp had when it had been running for a few hours.
People need to stop bring problems up that were fixed eons ago.
I hate that I have more ram in my computer than my operating system can handle just because my company downgraded it from Vista.
I have been using vista since the day it came out. I've never once had a problem with it. I could never go back to xp ever. cant wait for 7 though
I think my major issues with vista stem from the fact that other operating systems, and other internet browsers and such are becoming safer, using less resources, and being more robust at the same time, yet vista just seems to sap everything out of the hardware leaving less for actual use. After "dicking around" with Ubuntu for a while and seeing just how much you can run at once, while experiencing practically no slowdowns of any sort, Vista just seems like it's taking a step backwards.
I think this is just because of Microsoft lobbyists pulling strings in the army.
Uh, it's the army upgrading the OS they use on the timeline they set forth years ago.
When Win8 comes out, they will move to Win7.
yeah stability support and security is the last thing the military needs
Security, security, security. In that order, I think. At least they are using Microsoft.
There is job security too since the whole process will have to be repeated when they upgrade to 7 in a few years time.
This can't possibly end well.....
Everyone should check out Kamozaki's post above, there's enough said there.
Waiting for a parody video to come up about a military installation having to deal with UAC. =D
Sure then we can have a parody about Macs freezing because Apple are horrible at writing code for third party hardware or systems. Of course the good news is that no-one would be stupid enough to move large scale secure systems to Macs anyway.
@Mark Anderson: Huh? Why do you have to post comments about Macs on Windows topic?
I didn't have to. It was a cheap shot.
Sue me.
Mark, you're right - that sounds like a really funny parody.
Missile Launch in 5...4...3...2...1... Do you want to allow the following program to launch a nuclear missile?
Program Name: missile.exe
Publisher: US Army
Yes No
Cannot abort Missile Launch, Missile Launch is in use.
"Cannot Abort Mission...error system32...xxx"
.
.
.
A problem has been detected and windows has been shut down to prevent damage
to your computer.
If this is the first time you've seen this stop error screen,
restart your computer. If this screen appears again, follow
these steps:
Check to make sure any new hardware or software is properly installed.
If this is a new installation ask your hardware or software manufacturer
for any windows updates you might need.
If problems continue, disable or remove any newly installed hardware
or software. Disable BIOS memory options such as caching or shadowing.
If you need to use safe mode to remove or disable components, restart
your computer, press F8 to select Advanced Startup options, and then
select safe mode.
Technical information:
*** STOP: 0x0000000FE (0x00000006, 0x000000009, 0x847075CC)
Collecting data for crash dump...
Initializing disk for crash dump...
Beginning dump of physical memory.
Dumping physical memory to disk: 80
There going to have so many freaking issues LOL.
Not as many as you do apparently.
You would think the army would use linux or osx. Mostly because of the risk of vrii, or malware that could compromise security
LOL at the idea of OSX being used in a serious business or sensitive information environment.
Yeah they're going to use OS X...the first OS to always get hacked in hacking competitions.
That doesn't really make any sense. Why compromise low cost [in comparison with OSX], compatibility, reliability and sheer ubiquity for problems that can be prevented with a simple software program?
Windows is just as secure as Linux or OSX from outside - the problem occurs when someone on the INSIDE is stupid. A smart IT person can overcome that easily.
The short story is that Linux is a mess to deal with on a large scale level and OSX is expensive and closed in.
"Windows is just as secure as Linux or OSX from the inside..."
really?
Screen Share
Its like throwing your keys at a burglar.
Wouldn't the OS X licensing agreement forbid that?
"C. Except as and only to the extent permitted in this License and by applicable law, you may not copy, decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, or create derivative works of the Apple Software or any part thereof. THE APPLE SOFTWARE IS NOT INTENDED FOR USE IN THE OPERATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, AIRCRAFT NAVIGATION OR COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS, LIFE SUPPORT MACHINES OR OTHER EQUIPMENT IN WHICH THE FAILURE OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE COULD LEAD TO DEATH, PERSONAL INJURY, OR SEVERE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. "
OSX being used for ACTUAL work? HAHAHAHA that just made my day.
"OSX being used for ACTUAL work? HAHAHAHA that just made my day."
That's quite funny. You know what most people say when they are asked why they use Windows? Games!
Rule #1 in Information Security: Never take anyone seriously that uses the non-word "virii."
Viri is "men" in latin!
Virii would mean Viruses in Latin, BUT it is treated as a collection noun like air, so it doesn't normally pluralize!
See, I knew my 8th grade latin class would come in handy!
wow...
In the Marine Corps, my unit still had nearly 10 year old computers/laptops and we are STILL using windows nt/2000. include that with hundred and hundreds of "military security" updates, it seriously takes over 30-45 minutes to boot the computer and log in. very very frustrating. its hard to get anything done with the lag. I think the Corps is slowly transitioning all computers to XP now.
well.. here we go... goodbye world.. I can see the headline now.. "Generals frustrated computers keep getting BSOD have decided to start using stone tablets instead"
My goodness you are ignorant...
bsod: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3187/2639968934_f450b83a18.jpg?v=0.
Most idiotic comment ever. I haven't and I don't know anyone else who's had a single BSOD in Vista since Beta 2, and that's with me leaving my computer on for months at a time without restarting or shutting down. I wish I could say the same for OSX or Linux...
I guess the US army just likes always being one step behind.
What army uses OSX?
Cupertino Armed Corps
(CAC for short)
Fucking Windows Vista! Get Bill Gates in here!
You told us it would be faster and more secure!
But it is faste....
You can turn UAC off when operating in an Enterprise environment. So that you are not prompted are you sure when launching installation programs. . (By the way most users should not have the privelage to install their own software anyway. The DOD is always a couple of revs behind for stability purposes also. A brand spanking new OS is going to have a lot of bugs that you want other people to figure out for you so you don't experience the growing pains. Vista Business or Enterprise is a lot more stable compared to ultimate and media center as I have noticed. But in these environments OS and application loads are a lot more standardized. You have a baseline of hardware to go along with your software.
Now Vista for the army... then why the heck I see in govern offices computers using Windows 98??? :) I don't know why some people complain lol. Some OS's are good for certain stuff. I Agree Windows Vista > Windows XP in security. Anything can barely break XP.
Going to vista willallow"them" the ability to weed out incompatible and old. Hardware and software. Plus the jump to 7 from so on those old systems would be rough. Plus, if "they" are going to office 2007 also, let them learn the new office and not a new GUI as well.
Damn iPhone won't let me edit the errors above (using rss reader)