FAA May Ditch Vista For Linux

An anonymous reader writes "Another straw in the wind: following last week's news that the US Department of Transportation is putting a halt on upgrades to Windows Vista, Office 2007, and Internet Explorer 7, today comes word that the Federal Aviation Administration may ditch Vista and Office in favor of Google's new online business applications running on Linux-based hardware. (The FAA is part of the DOT.) The FAA's CIO David Bowen told InformationWeek he's taking a close look at the Premier Edition of Google Apps as he mulls replacements for the agency's Windows XP-based desktop computers. Bowen cited several reasons why he finds Google Apps attractive. 'From a security and management standpoint that would have some advantages,' he said."

training

this isnt going to happen tomorrow, or next week, or next month. training staff to use an entirly new system takes a lot of time and money. i will be supprised if we see this take effect before this time next year

Re:training

That's exactly right. When a business changes to a new application it's not as if the business tells employees that they can get by completing 80% as much for the next few weeks. It's basically "Yes it's new and we expect you to be at 100% speed immediately, deal with it." And it sucks for the employee for a week or two while they have to semi-rush or work a few extra hours but it's not the end of the world. Typically the same salary IT person that has always been there gets stuck answering all the questions. The only additional cost is anyone involved who might be paid hourly, they might have to work a few extra hours. In my mind, it's not the end of the world.

Re:training

Can't they just employ immigrants who learned to use computers in order to get a job? We're not talking complex applications here like 3D or compositing apps, those who can't use generic email, word processor or spreadsheet don't deserve to have a desk job.

Re:training

What's interesting though is that the FAA seems to think that the costs associated with training will in the end be cheaper than an upgrade to Vista.

Re:training

"What's interesting though is that the FAA seems to think that the costs associated with training will in the end be cheaper than an upgrade to Vista."

Don't forget that they'll need to retrain people for Vista and Office-whatever anyway. So it's not like one option is free and the other costs money.

Re:training

Exactly, it isn't just the costs of upgrading to Vista, its the cost of upgrading to Vista + Deployment + Retraining. I would also suspect that the FAA probably pays for some kind of actual support contract. They will still want to pay somebody like Redhat for a support contract (and probably Google as well), and they will still incur Deployment and Retraining Costs no matter what. The question really starts to become, who do they believe provides a product with the best productivity/TCO ratio.

Everybody's been through the Microsoft cycle multiple times now. Microsoft promises the world during development, but by the time a product actually ships, its years late, hugely over budget, and still has only 10% of the features originally promised (Remember Microsoft's database file system? The one that would revolutionize searches and data management and do away with folders? They've been promising that one since 1994 at least. It was supposed to be part of Windows 95!) And Microsoft's products End up having severe support issues during their lifetime (Business Crippling Worms anyone?) It heartens me that Organizations are really starting to think about going with other options.

Only minor training required

Probably most FAA systems run with a few forms-based applications sitting on top of some data base. They are not installing printers etc, the IT folk do that. Most likely very few people ever interact with the OS (except to reboot).From a user's perspective, it is not very hard to switch from one OS to another since the OS is hardly visible.

There would, however, be traing for IT and support people.

Re:training

Maybe I'm just a quick learner, but I can't see how Google Apps would require all that much training. Like everything of Google's that I've tried (with the exception of Google Ads, whose pricing structure remains mysterious), I found it had almost no learning curve whatsoever.

Am I really that much smarter than the people who work at the FAA?

Re:training

The FAA keeps what is by far the world's busiest civil air transportation system running with a remarkably good safety record. Every time you go to the airport, get on your plane, fly to your destination, get off your plane, and nothing else happens, you have the FAA to thank for it.

Re:training

Shh, don't question the mindless libertarian bullshit. If everyone realized that government employees as just as human as private employees, it would cause CHAOS around here.

Re:Every time I go outside...

The inevitable result would be more casualties, and market forces would only show up after the fact.

To say nothing of the difficulties in relying on market forces when consumers lack any clear way of judging the safety of a flight they are planning to buy a ticket on.

This is made even worse by most people's completely incompetence when judging danger. For example, travelling by train in Britain is MUCH safer than travelling by car, but whenever there is a railway accident hordes of idiots switch to cars because they think trains are dangerous. Yes, I do know about people preferring dangers they have a feeling of control over, but it only makes me think them even more idiotic.

If we ever relied on market forces to promote safety, it would merely lead to a lot of resources being spent on marketing (rather than achieving) safety, and even more misinformation being spread.

Well, Compare it to Vista

this isnt going to happen tomorrow, or next week, or next month. training staff to use an entirly new system takes a lot of time and money. i will be supprised if we see this take effect before this time next year

Well, I'm not a systems integrator in real life but I've taken classes. One of the big things to consider here is the potential for an intermediary stage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Google's Apps are largely platform independent. What this means is that I can think of an instantly perfect intermediary stage--instruct the employees to use Google Apps while they still have XP and old Office applications on their machines. But, you know, give them a hard date by which everyone should be using Google Apps (oh, there's always problem workers but leave that to middle management). I assume the large thing these people rely on their computers for is simply these editing suites so once that barrier is broken, install Linux and give them quick 8 hour orientation classes in how to do the same things in Linux that you used to do in Windows (pretty minimal, I assume).

Other option is just Vista & the new Office. Where at some point you just have to install the new Office (I don't think old & new can be installed at the same time) and make them use it. Now, while I'm sure Vista is more similar to XP than Linux and the Office applications are probably similar also, you know there's going to be bumps.

That said, I don't think the transition to Google Apps on Linux would be any more painful than the transition to Vista running Office. I suppose time will tell though. Hopefully my assumptions are correct and this sparks interest on this huge cost savings?

I guess if you really wanted to promote Linux, you would write tutorials on how to take advantage of this switch to Vista/Office and how to put your workers on Linux/Google Apps. When you make cheap and extremely convenient, they will come.

Re:Well, Compare it to Vista

One of the big things to consider here is the potential for an intermediary stage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Google's Apps are largely platform independent.

As are OpenOffice, MSOffice, and the majority of Windows applications (thanx to wine). If they have a particular desktop application that does not work under linux or wine, all they have to do is ask on wine-devel and it would be fixed like flies on stank because of how high-profile the situation is.

BBH

Re:Well, Compare it to Vista

That said, I don't think the transition to Google Apps on Linux would be any more painful than the transition to Vista running Office.

I don't know about that. This is the same Google Apps that many users got locked out of a couple weeks ago. Putting your productivity apps on someone else's servers just isn't a good idea. OpenOffice would probably be a much more prudent move.

Re:training

I don't think training/timing is a big issue. Any time MS releases a major update like new versions of Vista & Office it requires a fair amount of retraining for non-technical people and even a lot of technical people. Since there's a retraining cost involved no matter what, then it's up to the company/organization to decide their best upgrade path, whether it's to the latest MS offerings or an entirely different platform.

Personally I find the big news to be the fact that more and more corporations, governments, and entire countries, are using Vista/Office2007 as justification to seriously consider non-MS products. Granted it's still a very small percentage of MS customers that have done this so far, but if the groundswell continues and a number of these groups are successful, then it could just be the start of a trend away from MS dominance.

All options require training

training staff to use an entirely new system takes a lot of time and money.

Technical similarities to XP aside, Vista basically IS an "entirely new system" as well, from an end-user and administrative perspective. The UI has been messed with. Security, right from the user prompts down to alterations in driver architecture, has been altered significantly. Applications released roughly in conjunction with Vista (IE7 and Office 2007) have significant changes (new XML file formats in office, more strict compliance with XHTML and CSS in IE7...). Compounding that the benefits to business are minimal compared to XP in its current state. The business case to upgrade vs migrate is less convincing than ever before.

It is nearly that case with my employer as well--we almost might as well move to macs or Linux vs. XP--the impact of Vista on the enterprise thereis nearly that big. Almost all of the intranet apps are designed and tested against IE6. Running them on Firefox is glitchy but it works, but using IE7 often completely BREAKS the app. Over three quarters of the products we sell will not function under Vista and never will ("next generation" replacements are being developed for release over the next couple of years). Fully half of the hardware we have is not "Vista capable". We have XP and it (mostly) works (good enough anyways). Why risk breaking what is essentially unbroken? Do we really need eye candy? We are already firewalled and antivirused to high heaven so is there any REAL benefit to Vista's largely unproven security enhancements? Which brings up the fact that our corporate antivirus stuff apparently breaks in Vista...

FAA's serious consideration of Google's apps really looks VERY compelling and makes a lot of sense, even if adoption would be over a couple of years. The architecture of Linux is more proven and more secure by far than Windows XP OR Vista. The price per client is significantly less. Google's application-server-thin-client model is much less burdensome. Open and Free systems have much better "real" support (MS makes the argument that closed software gets better support because it is backed by a big, rich vendor but I think most people in the know realise that in practice thereis WAY MORE help and support for Linux because of backing by many vendors and a huge developer community, whereas only MS can offer certain levelsof support).

I do thing that Vista is STILL very much on the FAA's horizon though. Government agencies as well as big corporations are coming under more scrutiny and are being more compelled to do due diligence and put as much up for competitive bid as possible--and get the best deal possible. MS' standard prices and offerings are VERY FAR from competitive since they've gone a long time without competing. Governmental agencies around the world are, as often as not, playing low cost Linux-based alternatives against Microsoft to "force Bill's hand" as it were. Even if Google's software suite falls short of requirements in the end, the FAA could very likely get a special sub-$100-per-user offer from Microsoft for Office upgrades.

I'd hate to seeit turnout that way, but anything that cuts down MS (either inmarket share or insane profit margins) is good in my book.

Re:training

90% of the training argument is pure FUD. I personally have converted many windows users to Linux who had never even touched it before and they are up and productive within a day. Your average office worker (at least in my place of work) uses a word processor, web browser, email client, and one or two propriatary apps specific for their department which are almost all web based and are browser friendly. There have been a few time in which people have some app that cannot be a web app, or will only run in IE or something and we will deploy it to them via Citrix until either a Linux version is written or it is converted to a web based app.

Funny enough, the hardest Linux converts are the Windows "Power users" because they no long know how to tweak...aka fuck up their new desktop. But for a large majority of office staff Linux either already is or could easily be working perfectly for them in almost no transition time.

I personally believe that if all the over protective MCSE's in the world woke up tomorrow with a decent level of knowledge about the Linux desktop within a couple months Linux and Windows in the corporate workplace would trade places for market share.

Google Apps Appliance

They need to bundle that up in a appliance so they can sell it to enterprises that do not wish to
store their data out of house.

Agree, with additional reason

Fast internet access for business customers is still somewhat expensive. Connecting to your own server in-house with a fast LAN will be cheaper in many cases.

Re:Google Apps Appliance

The 1960's called, they want their computing paradigms back. Future of software? More like the past, we're coming full circle...

Re:Google Apps Appliance

The 1960's called, they want their computing paradigms back. Future of software? More like the past, we're coming full circle...

It won't be the first time we're coming full circle in computer technologies (or elsewhere), it doesn't mean that he's wrong. Do you think "organic food" is a thing of the past? It's pretty modern franchise these days.

In computer software, we see interpreted languages coming in an out every few years. When I had my Apple II, the primary means of programming it was an interpreted Applesoft Basic script.

As computers advance and more performance is required, the interpreters become full-blown compilers (C, C++, later Basic compilers), but then the needs for flexibility arises and today we use lots of interpreted languages again (JavaScript, PHP, Perl, ASP, Ruby, Java).

And yet again the need for performance converted those to compiled language in the mid term (later Java runtimes /JIT/, .NET which is compiled on demand, although stored as source or bytecodes). Microsoft even has C# compiler now which compiles to machine code with no CLR dependencies now (as used in their popular research OS - Singularity).

Still the portable version of .NET interprets... as a mobile device has no enough RAM to do the compilation and store the result, which is ironically the same reason Basic was interpreted on Apple II-s to start with.

The notion that the future of software is to store absolutely everything remotely, like is the case with Google apps, is a very shortsighted one. It's a current short-term / mid-term trend.

There's already lots of talk about rich clients which support "interrupted connectivity", which is, web apps that have lots of functionality even when you have no internet (i.e. with laptop on the go etc.). These apps operate by usually having a small and simple web-server or runtime and SQL database embeded in them, along with ability for rich caching of remotely downloaded assets. Examples include the upcoming Firefox 3, Adobe's Apollo, Microsoft's WinFX (aka NET3) and so on.

Re:Google Apps Appliance

Definitely. If Google started selling application appliances. Wow. Not only do you get the ease of central management, but if Google does it like they do everything else, it'd be easily scalable. I'd imagine the answer to "We need more processing power / Disk space" would be to add another appliance or so, and make a single config change. This is really exciting stuff, if it evolves to that point.

Re:Google Apps Appliance

Hey, I know, we could put all these appliances into some kind of enclosure with common power, cooling, and even super fast backplane. We would probably need to keep these "frames" in climate-controlled rooms. The main "frame" would serve the most common apps, and if some offices needed some specialized stuff they could buy small versions, kind of like miniature computers! Hah, I kill myself.

Or are security minded...

Google Apps, the way they're doing it, can't be assured to be secure. It's a nifty idea, but
unless you LIKE the idea of a potential information leak (including business critical and identity
type information...), you probably don't want to be using their service unless you've no other
choice.

An Apps appliance probably would be a way around this problem. Buy one like you buy some of their
search engine cluster as an appliance for indexing your intranet and exposed Internet presence-
that way you get the security and control you need (Though make no mistake, while it is more secure
than what the FAA is now proposing, it's not as secure as OO.org would be on a desktop...)

Hunting for a discount?

From the article: If Microsoft can satisfy his concerns over compatibility with the agency's existing applications and demonstrate why such a move would make financial sense given Google Apps's low price

Sound familiar? It seems like the tried-and-true tactic of publicly looking into Linux so Microsoft will rush in and offer support and discounts. Hopefully, they are seriously considering Linux regardless.

Already there

"Hopefully, they are seriously considering Linux regardless."
FAA is outsourcing the whole flight services infrastructure to Lockheed. A rep from Lockheed gave a presentation to our local EAA chapter on the new system and it's rather cool. Each person gets a multi-head display and all the software is running on Linux. I don't recall the distro. So when you call in for a weather report or to check if there are TFRs in your flight path, you will be talking to a guy running Linux. It makes sense for the FAA to switch because they will likely want access to the same software. The only downside is that there will be fewer of these people, so you may be talking to someone far away who doesn't know the local area and local weather.

Google apps/security?

...

Maybe I'm thinking of a different Google apps, but how is running Google software more secure? Aren't google apps accessed from google servers? Doesn't that mean this government agency would be running applications from and storing data on servers they aren't maintaining?

I'm not saying that google makes lousy software, I'm just saying that I would be nervous if I couldn't actually directly manage the servers that were responsible for creating and storing the information.

Re:Google apps/security?

They not only operate in the public eye by convention, they do so by law. Has nobody heard of the Freedom of Information Act? Virtually all data that the FAA would store on those servers would be public anyway, and promptly available on request from anyone in the general public.

I agree. This is a _HORRIBLE_ idea

We're talking about US Government documents being stored on non-government servers. First, I'd be really surprised if something like that was even legal. Second, I have real issues even if it IS legal.

If the "ditch" office/windows they're going to have to use GMail for ALL DOCUMENTS. Anything else would have to be like .txt or .pdf that's emailed around (probably using google servers again, so it's moot).

Furthermore, tell me this slashdot: Why is it better to be locked-in to Googles proprietary software instead of Microsofts?

As others have said, this would only be a good idea, IMO, as a "GApps Appliance" that can be properly audited and approved by US Government security experts.

Re:I agree. This is a _HORRIBLE_ idea

We're talking about US Government documents being stored on non-government servers. First, I'd be really surprised if something like that was even legal. Second, I have real issues even if it IS legal.

Okay, I can follow that logic. It's sort of like the way US Government agencies do not use private financial institutions to manage their money, but keep it all in Fort Knox, and use only Fort Knox Credit Cards? Huh?

Google's specialty is high volume data management and security, and they take that very seriously. If they cannot yet do a better job for less cost than any business or agency whose main purpose is something else, then I would be very much surprised.

Perhaps the government should establish a National Data Management Agency for its own information needs, at the cabinet level. But that won't happen with this administration: it lacks the foresight and considers "intelligence" to be disinformation that will permit them to invade Middle East countries.

Hmm, possibly establishing a USNDMA would make sense. The USDVA (Veterans Affairs) already has a massive data sharing network for the CPRS (Computerized Patient Record System). It wouldn't be much of a reach to build out from that for all other government data. A USNDMA that was hardened against earthquakes, hurricanes, terrorist attacks, etc, might be a good idea, and perhaps cost less than the total the individual agencies are already spending on data security and management.

Re:I agree. This is a _HORRIBLE_ idea

Yes, the VBA/Automation is a big part of what's missing.

But as others have said here, Google Documents doesn't even have Find & Replace capabilities yet. (They only have a "Replace All" option and even that is "experimental").

This is the future, I think. I really do. But not today. Not yet. It's just not ready.

Re:Google apps/security?

If I had to leave important FAA information on a server, I'd feel safer with Google than from either the lowest bidding or highest bribing IT company for the FAA.

Ditching the monopolistic...

Great to see someone thinking about ditching software made by a monopolistic behemoth in favour of the little guy!

Oh wait, Google apps? never mind.

I hate to step back a second

But the article fails to mention why the XP systems need replacement. Any organization as conservative as the FAA no doubt waited a year or two before rolling out XP, so even the earlier systems are only a few years old, and probably far from slouches. Why does the release of Vista necessitate an upgrade, especially if you aren't going to be upgrading to Vista?

Re:I hate to step back a second

But the article fails to mention why the XP systems need replacement.

Simple. MS says they won't support XP after a given date. After that date the FAA (and everybody else) would have to upgrade to Vista to continue getting support from MS.

If the DOT/FAA goes with linux they'll likely go with a vendor like RedHat or Novell who will offer full support services without arbitrary drop-dead dates for support, much easier upgrade paths, etc.

I think I've seen this movie before.

1. Some CIO flirts with the idea of migrating to a different platform in order to get a better deal on licenses.
2. Vendor with monopoly rushes in with truckloads of licenses at "discount rates" to secure their position.
3. CIO returns with whitepaper indicating a TCO in favor of monopoly.
4. ???

If the "ditch" occurs, then that would be news.

Outsourcing Responsibility

You can't outsource security [e.g. oh look google is so much better at keeping our documents secure] any more than you can outsource responsibility. Why isn't this guy simply looking at Open Office, or hell the other free tools like AbiWord, Gnumeric, etc.

Ah, to be ignorant of technology, but rife with enough buzzwords to be dangerous.

Not only are the google versions of the tools not nearly feature complete, but they're over the internet. Thus guaranteed to be sucktastically slow (especially when a lot of people use it) and very likely insecure in the end (hint: gmail has already had a few goofs). I'm all for ditching Windows, but using online office tools is just short sighted. Within a year or two of the switch they'll be climbing back into bed with MS Office [no doubt].

Also, if you're just going to use AJAX based web tools, what does it matter what OS you run?

Tom

Re:Outsourcing Responsibility

You can't outsource security [e.g. oh look google is so much better at keeping our documents secure]

Of course you can. For many organizations, handling document security is a major problem. Even basic stuff like backups is a major PITA

But even more than that, presumably one of the things he was referring to is the security implications of having people download "stuff" that may or may not be legitimate documents, and accidentally running it (and don't even try to give me shit about how there aren't any real viruses for Linux - if a major government agency starts relying on Linux boxes, you can bet someone, somewhere will start looking at ways to use it for intrusion). Yes, lots of apps have far saner policies about running things than Office has, but avoiding downloading files from mail accounts entirely in favor of processing those documents outside of your normal environment whenever possible would have the effect of limiting the potential damage further.

It's not that a webapp is required to do that, but that Google's apps present a possible way of doing it that is convenient and available.

Not only are the google versions of the tools not nearly feature complete, but they're over the internet. Thus guaranteed to be sucktastically slow (especially when a lot of people use it)

Maybe, maybe not. Google Spreadsheets handle a lot of Excel files that breaks badly in Open Office for me, and it's also FAR faster to open a document in than Open Office is on my box, and far less resource hungry to just keep open, which reduces the time to open even more. If I'd been editing lots of large spreadsheets instead of mostly viewing the occasional small one, perhaps Google Spreadsheets would be a pain, but for MY use it's actually far more efficient than Open Office. Haven't tried Gnumeric for a while, and I rarely need a word processor but when I do Abiword just haven't cut it for me (I tried it again a couple of days ago, and the printouts of the document I tested it on just came out horrendously ugly).

Also, if you're just going to use AJAX based web tools, what does it matter what OS you run?

It matters because the IT department has to manage the systems regardless what apps you run on them.

Re:Outsourcing Responsibility

You can't outsource security [e.g. oh look google is so much better at keeping our documents secure] any more than you can outsource responsibility.

Of course you can. Security is one of the oldest businesses ever outsourced (that means taken away from your own employees/slaves/servants and given to a foreign group for money/treasures/valuable gifts). What do you think the name 'soldier' comes from? It's a person working for sold (from latin solidus = a Roman gold coin), not because of loyality or proudness or legal requirements. Having foreign groups serving as your protection is one of the oldest tricks in the book because you hope that the foreign people are ignorant about your internal struggles and intrigues or don't have any local alliances, and if they aren't as independent as expected, you might replace them without fear of a local unrest.

That's the business of Pinkerton and all the other security agencies, and even outsourcing bookkeeping and document production, exchange and storage is old news. Every middle age town had its writers or calculators whose business was to work for the local traders who weren't able to write or didn't have the calculatory knowledge for bookkeeping. And even today you go to a solicitor if you really want your documents to be correct, authentic and secure.

seriously?

Bowen cited several reasons why he finds Google Apps attractive. 'From a security and management standpoint that would have some advantages,' he said."
 
What about openoffice.org surely its more secure than an internet app.

Pilot advisory - Seattle airspace

the Federal Aviation Administration may ditch Vista and Office in favor of Google's new online business applications running on Linux-based hardware.

The FAA issued a pilot advisory for the Seattle area: Pilots should be aware of the potential to encounter flying chairs any time they are east and slightly south of Seattle center controlled airspace.

Big Discount Stick

I'd like to believe such a thing is being seriously considered but it's probably just the same-ole same-ole. Some poor MS salesdroid is going to be thwacked bloody until he comes across with big discounts and free consulting services and training for a Vista deployment. Still Linux has to be a least a credible threat for that to work. I wonder how many Aerons have come to a splintery end because of Linux induced discounting.

It's a bargaining chip

The guy is just trying to get his MS license costs down - sensible enough.

Whats the betting that after his Microsoft trip they will come up with a vastly reduced price?

They should just tell Microsoft

They should just tell Microsoft - give us Windows XP for 5-7 more years OR we go Linux.

After all apparently Windows XP already works OK for them, and new computers capable of running Vista tolerably will run XP pretty well ;).

It'll be crazy for the FAA or DoT to switch to Vista, there are only a handful of pluses for them (nope DirectX 10 support is not it), whereas there are so many minuses - trouble with drivers, trouble with compatibility, costs of retraining and support, lower performance (so far most of the benchmarks indicate that Vista is slower even for office apps) etc.

Then after 5-7 years, maybe Linux/Wine will have a decent Windows XP compatibility layer and the FAA and others can continue running their apps on a free OS of their choice (or a commercial Microsoft Windows compatible competitor ).

moral?

The FAA has a real problem when things crash.

I can see why the FAA dumped Vista......

.... as they'd have to deal with this all of the time.

- A plane is about to land. Cancel or Allow?
- A plane is about to take off. Cancel or Allow?
- A transport truck is about to crash. Cancel or Allow?

You'd get sick of having to click Cancel or Allow all of the time too.

Oh wait.

Will never happen

I work within the DOT, there has been no discussion of linux or Mac replacing windows, the discussions are about not upgrading to Vista and Office 2007/IE7 due to inconsistancies with the custom applications, and much of the hardware would need to be replaced, not even upgraded, but totally replaced.

"...Linux-based hardware..."

WTF?

Sounds like FAA's top technology official can't differentiate between hardware and software.

The problem with these stories is...

The problem with stories like "Foo may switch to Linux" is that it is now a standard deal negotiation tactic to in fact buy new Microsoft product licences. Or not. But the fact the guy doesn't switch but rather uses publicity to say he might switch, is a subtle hint.

What's the point of Google apps?

I've tried them (Google apps). The web based word processor is roughly identical to wordpad (free with Windows), or the text editor with OSX. This is a MASSIVE reduction in functionality compared to word or open office. I do not understand how this web based word processor can be used for anything more complicated than a simple memo. I suspect that if you put down any user remotly farmiliar with MS-Office and force them to use Google apps, there will be some serious revolt. Put them behind Open Office, which may be somewhat different than MS Office, but HAS SIMILAR CAPABILITIES, that user will learn to use it with possibly minimal rumblings. What is wrong with Open Office? Why would anyone choose Google apps which have I estimate 5% of the functionality of Open Office ??? So, IMO, any web based attempt at anything as remotely complex as a office suite is going to suck so freaking hard compared to a desktop application, no mater what the platform be it Linux, OSX or Windows.

As much as I like seeing these articles..

Security is NOT one of the things I'd be claiming, using a third party to provide my app
functionality by remote. If I were the person in charge, I'd probably nix this one about
as fast as the DOT did Vista and Office 2007. Simply put, you can't guarantee anything
about information leakage, snooping, and so forth with this model.

When the Microsoft salesman calls...

...always have your Ubuntu mug, your Debian mug, and your iPod lying on your desk.

Ahh...

microsoft releases a new version of their OS. Let the negotiations begin.

Just like Intel and Dell...

This is just a ploy to get lower pricing from Microsoft. Dell used to do this all the time with Intel... Every year or so they'd threaten to start buying AMD chips. Then Intel would give them lower pricing and it never happened... oops, wait a minute... never mind.

likely...

likely just an attempt to get a better deal from Microsoft. an attempt that will likely succeed.

Oh...

OH SNAP!

Compatibility?

From TFA:

"Bowen, however, said he has not definitely ruled out an FAA-wide upgrade to Windows Vista and related software -- if Microsoft can satisfy his concerns over compatibility with the agency's existing applications and demonstrate why such a move would make financial sense given Google Apps's low price. 'We have a trip to Microsoft scheduled for later this month,' said Bowen."

He considering an OS change and a business productivity suite change, but he's concerned about compatibility?

I've been a contractor on-site at an FAA campus for the last 2-3 years, and I can tell you that we are very much a Microsoft shop out here. Just about every in-house app is developed using Microsoft technology, from .NET to VB 6 and even Access. I can think of only one app, out of many, many apps, that runs on Linux. I'm not sure about other FAA sites, but from what I've heard, I get the feeling that this is the case throughout the majority of the FAA.

So, if we do change to a Linux/Google Apps combo for desktops, it's going to require approximately 28,751.00234 crap-tons of money to rework the majority of our in-house apps to work with Linux. I'm not saying that isn't feasible...but I would definitely be surprised if it cost less than switching to Vista. I'm not a huge MS fan, mind you; I use Linux at home, and hell, I think it'd be kind of neat for everyone around here to be using Linux. But I just don't see that happening.

I'd also like to note that the FAA just switched from Windows 2000 to Windows XP less than about 6 months ago. Thus, I'm not expecting the next change, whether it be to Linux/Google Apps or to Vista, to occur any time soon.

Bullshit detector going through the roof

This is the oldest trick in the book. Threaten to leave and then get a huge discount from Microsoft. Laugh your ass off knowing full well you never intended to change. So lame.

FYI...

The FAA's main data system is driven by HP-UX, at least last time I worked for them. Considering the amount of custom software involved, I don't think they've switched away. I'm guessing that these are probably people's "personal" work computers that they're talking about.

It's definitely nice to know they're looking to Linux for a desktop solution.

Upgrading to Vista yet?

Why would they be choosing over Vista/linux now anyway, it would be years before a large organisation like that would even consider using Vista. By then we'd be on our second service pack, they would have nailed problems with backward compatibility.

Its a hard enough decision for a large organisation to switch to a different word processor, or even upgrade, an entirely new platform would cost a prohibitive sum in training, implementation and rewriting internal apps. Its going to take a long time to make the decision, and meanwhile microsoft will be "Hey, how about we give you this to stay with us"...

vista, the windows killer...

LOL.. and here Microsoft though that Linux or mac would be a real threat to their operations and low and behold, their own operating system is so bad that people just don't want this crap anymore. ROTFLOL... I think MS would have been better off creating just 1 version of Vista with install options. Mac sells 2 Server and Desktop. Most modern Linux distros let you choose what you want to install it as Server or Workstation, and then let you pick the packages you want to install too.

How many times have we seen this?

An executive from a big organization X is looking at upgrading his Microsoft-centric network of products. He thinks he will get a good deal from MS because he is a big shot and the company or government agency is a big deal. He is shocked at the initial price MS comes back with. He knows he is not going to rip-out all the MS stuff across the massive network but really has no other way to bargain other than issuing a release saying he is evaluating (Redhat/Suse/ and now Google) and wants bargaining chips to take back to MS.

Let me tell you the end of the story for all of you, MS comes back and gives the software away on the initial upgrade pricing but nails them to the wall for years on support.

In 5 years, rinse and repeat.

WTF? Tallking to Dell about Thin Clients?

From TFA interview with FAA chief information officer David Bowen

Bowen cited several reasons why he finds Google Apps attractive. "It's a different sort of computing strategy," he said. "It takes the desktop out of the way so you're running a very thin client. From a security and management standpoint that would have some advantages."
....
Bowen said he's in talks with the aviation safety agency's main hardware supplier, Dell Computer, to determine if it could deliver Linux-based computers capable of accessing Google Apps through a non-Microsoft browser once the FAA's XP-based computers pass their shelf life. "We have discussions going on with Dell," Bowen said. "We're trying to figure out what our roadmap will be after we're no longer able to acquire Windows XP."

I'm sorry, but do you really think Dell is going to enthusiastically push thin clients? AFAIK, Dell isn't even in the thin client business, they are in the PC business. Dell has an interest in dooming this from the start in order to protect their PC business. This CIO Bowen has no idea of where to go with this, so somebody needs to whisper in his ear. He needs to talk with Sun, since they have considerable experience with Sunray thin clients [sun.com]. Maybe even Neoware thin clients [ibm.com] from IBM/Lenovo.

Better bargaining position

It's probably the usual stuff going on here....

They'll now get a large discount from Microsoft, which is probably what they're really after anyway.

Nothing to see here, move along...

"FAA May Ditch Vista For Linux" ?

That title is totally misleading... They're not ditching Vista for Linux... They're thinking about the possibility of ditching Vista in favor of google applications. Google applications running on Linux has no bearing on the fact that the FAA is choosing google applications...

That's like saying: "I like Hondas better than Fords because the gas tank is made with different materials."

This should scare you

FAA (after several extremely expensive false starts) finally deployed a flight control system to replace the Sperry-Univac 8300s. You'd think they would have learned something from these mistakes, but there are several things that scare me about this:

1) The fact that Windows Vista (an unproven not yet released OS) is being considered for mission critical systems.

2) The fact that Government might tie a crucial part of national infrastructure to any single company (Microsoft or a high-flying dot com)

3) The fact that Linux was considered but not BSD, OpenSolaris, OSX and any number of other OSs suggests that the FAA still doesn't understand their problem, instead they focus on a sole-source vendor who can claims to be able to solve it, whatever it is.

This just in

The FAA Reports several airlines have collided with pigs mid flight. Scientists are baffled yet too busy to find the cause, as they all have hot dates tonight.

Seriously though, the FAA switching would be a pretty big step..but I don't see it actually happening. At least, not till something post-vista.

Google apps?!

Umm...Google apps?! That's even more "proprietary" than Microsoft's. Madness!

Google a kindeler gentler MS

If the FAA wants to gain control of there systems go with a Linux infrastructure, locally. Google offers net apps, but Google is really no different than MS when it comes to your IT infrastructure, keep it loacla, keep it Free. The fact that Google uses Linux on its servers is not an endorsement of Linux or FOSS, it just makes $$$.

Re:Oh yeah, another nail in the coffin

So let me get this straight... we stop a good product because you can no longer make money selling your services to companies? If there truly no longer is a need for the services you offer, why should we support you?

Re:Oh yeah, another nail in the coffin

Your whining sounds exactly like all the seamstresses who were replaced by looms, all the assembly line workers who were replaced by machines, all the telephone operators who were replaced by automated switching, all the freight train job losses due to the advent of the superhighway and freight trucks, etc. Changes happen. Get used to it.

Re:Oh yeah, another nail in the coffin

At least with Microsoft Products i can still sell my services, support, licensing, hardware and services.

Boo-fucking-hoo. That proves that not everything that is good for the customer is good for you. Let the old business model die, long live new business model.

In the meantime, Free Software and co. will continue as if nothing had changed, their product continues free, revenue (for whoever is aiming for it) continues coming from the same sources.

Re:Oh yeah, another nail in the coffin

What does google have to do with free software?

Summer of Code [google.com], contributions to Wine [google.com], Firefox money ...

My question is a serious question. Even though you may hate Microsoft, it created jobs.

And so did wars, look at the amount of jobs in the Military Industrial Complex. You may want to take a look at the parable of the Broken Window [wikipedia.org]. It explains how eventual positive consequences of negative acts shouldn't be used to justify them.

That is something i seriously question and find it terribly ironic you chose not to answer and throw around you illogical praise for free software as if its the magical dust that will save your future.

Small Business USA will adapt to the new reality. Many companies will die, others will spring. Possibly, the ones that mimic Google business model (Free (as in beer or as in speech, it depends) Software, Paid Services) will have more chance that the ones what follow Microsoft strategy (Software lock-in, extend, embrace, extinguish). Time will tell.

Re:But Google's gmail has been cracked

Could you back this up with something showing that gmail is routinely cracked?
I use it on a daily basis, and this is interesting if true.

Re:Oh yeah, another nail in the coffin

Fantastic, lets worship another "overlord" and move everything we do to a REAL "black-box" company.

I have to admit, this is what scares me.

Look, like most slashdotters, I want to believe in the 'do no evil' thing, and you know, when it comes to the intentions of Larry and Sergey, I do believe it. Everything I have seen of those two guys suggests to me that they are geeks first and billionaire capitalists second, I am just afraid that there is an element of 'Frankenstein's monster' in the whole Google phenomenon.

There are people out there (and lots of them) that would literally kill to control the kind of wealth and power that google has amassed. It would not be completely ludicrous to suggest that Google is currently the most powerful organisation on the planet. Google results can make or break companies and build/ruin reputations and with the Google apps model we are poised to hand over a lot more. That information will be around for a long time, it will probably outlive us all. It isn't going to bio-degrade, it isn't going to self-destruct.

It's too much trust. There are things I might put into a document or spreadsheet that I would not be comfortable discussing with my close family. There are things I do at work that I am not even allowed to discuss with my wife. Yet, we are expected to hand them over to google on the basis of the 'do no evil' promise (which as we have seen is impossible to keep regardless of how well intended). Right now I would rely on security through obscurity. I am a relatively obscure individual, it is unlikely anyone (beyond a small group of competitors and friend/family) would be interested in what I write in my documents, but what about if someday I want to become less obscure? Go into politics or a similar type of public life... then there will be more interest, and it will all be sitting right there.

I guess what I am saying is that it is important to bear in mind that it was Sergey and Larry that promised 'do no evil' not 'Google'. Google doesn't have a conscious, it doesn't care about good vs evil, even human's struggle to make that distinction. We are talking about handing over data that will outlive the founders, and will outlive the promise. I am the only one who is nervous about that??

Re:I've got something to say....

Right band, wrong song

Re:Oh yeah, another nail in the coffin

At least with Microsoft Products i can still sell my services, support, licensing, hardware and services. Google? I can sell a short contract to replace myself.

I can see where you are coming from because for the past 10 years I have made my livelihood because of the massive spread of Microsoft products... Rather the massive failure of Microsoft Products.

However, I have always been aware that if either Microsoft fixed their products, made them easier to use out of the box, or a competitor did it for them and gained market dominance then I would be out of a job.

So in truth I have made a living for the past 10 years because a large company has broken products, but I have always been looking for alternative work or something more or less social. (*coughs* Music *coughs*)

So my suggestion to all of those who are MSCEs or anyone support Microsoft Boxes/Networks/Applications...

Diversify now!

Learn a new programming language... Get into robotics... Learn a foreign language... Start using OS X or Linux...

Because as the Anti-Virus companies have realized, times change and your bread and butter may just go away one morning.

Who is to say that Microsoft won't just copy Google's application method anyways?

Re:Oh yeah, another nail in the coffin

At least with Microsoft Products i can still sell my services, support, licensing, hardware and services. Google? I can sell a short contract to replace myself.

hmmm... sounds like one of those buggy whip makers when the horseless carriage was being introduced...

Wow; Do you have it wrong

This is replacing the Office package. Nothing more. Laptops are still needed. Desktops are still needed. It is just that they are more likely to run Linux. With MS, you have no real way to offer true service to a group like the FAA. You can't get into the OS and fix the problems. Worse, all you have are virus fix after virus fix. All in all, MS is bad for you and bad for the buyer. Only 2 groups really come out ahead with Windows; MS and crackers. If all of your customers switched to Linux today, they will still need training and apps.

If and when Google decides to start competiting in all avenues, then you have issues. But they are showing that they are looking to break MS's monopoly. If that happens, then computers will flow everywhere as computing prices will drop. And there will need to be a LOT of training (read services).