Do you develop on GitHub? You can keep using GitHub but automatically sync your GitHub releases to SourceForge quickly and easily with this tool so your projects have a backup location, and get your project in front of SourceForge's nearly 20 million monthly users. It takes less than a minute. Get new users downloading your project releases today!
Posted
by
Hemos
from the making-inroads-in-a-giant-market dept.
D3 wrote to us with a story from Federal Computer Weekly that details the plans of GTSI (Government Technology Service Inc.) to team with Red Hat. They plan to team up to offer "enterprise level" for the federal government contracts.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Of course the US government still is one of the largest users of WordPerfect; and the Navy bought thousands of licenses for OS/2. Hopefully Linux will have better success.
Obvious question: is GTSI going to put in the time and money to get a security certification for a given distro? Seems like that would be a major selling point, since "that other OS" claims to be certified, when really the ONLY version that was ever certified was NT3.51, which, er, they don't sell or support any more...
Linux is a solid choice for government users because of its stability, scalability and interoperability with other operating systems.
Yes, indeed - as it is for all users.
Linux already enjoys a robust presence throughout the federal market, despite the common perception that it has yet to penetrate government IT shops.
It is really nice to see that an institution as regulated as government is allowing use of Linux. My company (a large bank) has outlawed its use since it is a "hacker OS." I'm pleasantly surprised to see the government taking an interest.
I have worked for a government contractor for about a year now, and all I can say is yikes! There are mountains of obscure paperwork and requirements for everything you do. If you thought that the government passed a lot of laws controlling private citizens, you should see the laws it passes about itself!
The most recent move has been toward COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) software. The real question is: is Open Source stuff COTS? The obvious answer is yes, but how do you convince someone who hasn't seen the real world since the 80's of this?
As and example of how wierd things get, someone periodically removes tcsh from our systems believing it to be "shareware" (and therefore not COTS). Since we all have/bin/tcsh in/etc/passwd, nobody can login. Eventually, someone with a backdoor (for just such a purpose) sneaks in and puts tcsh back.
I don't envy anyone trying to introduce anything "new" or "innovative" or even "useful" to the government.
With all the money they save by using Linux rather than Windows, they can buy even more useless and extravagant stuff at the end of the year in order to keep their existing budget!
(I used to work at a federal agency, yes, they do that. I got a dual pentium II computer out of the deal, well, to use, at least. And that was when the Pentium chips ran over $700 EACH. They bought four of those computers...)
Hehe, it's sad. Bets that not one dollar will actually be saved. Just spent on stuff other than windows. Not like that's a bad thing...
This is a good thing. This is just a start but as more and more IT workers start implementing linux there will be a bigger demand for companies like this.
"The number one opportunity in the government is on the server side and on the technical desktop,"
Makes me wonder if they will try to increase the development of a general desktop for all markets, Something Linux Could deffinatly use . Gentleman, you can't fight in here, this is the war room..
In the 1970s, Soviet programmers had enough skill with Forth and Lisp to build useful applications on primitive Soviet computers. This productivity threatened to wipe out the American advantage in computer hardware. To solve this "software gap", the Pentagon created the "Ada Project". The secret goal of the project: to lure the Soviet PHPBs (pointy-haired party bosses) into forcing a bloated and inefficient language on their programmers, thus soaking up scarce Soviet computer resources.
Hey, Henry Baker said it [netcom.com], and he's, like, famous, or at least prolific [netcom.com], so he must be right!
So Uncle Sam now getting behind Linux. Do they realize the same trick won't work a second time? Do they underestimate the skill of Chinese programmers? Or... I can't bear to contemplate the third possibility.... -- "But, Mulder, the new millennium doesn't begin until January 2001."
Seems like that would be a major selling point, since "that other OS" claims to be certified, when really the ONLY version that was ever certified was NT3.51, which, er, they don't sell or support any more...
That's an interesting point. My personal feeling is that Red Hat might release a certified Linux distribution, at a high expense, with nice technical descriptions of the protocols, the necessities of each security level, and things of such cosmetic nature. Underlying their secure version will be open source Linux. And I can imagine that any actions that move against the particular open-source movement that Red Hat stands for, ie. by close sourcing particular parts of the system, would recieve a backlash of negative publicity.
On the other hand, if Red Hat can spin off security through obscurity, or anything through obscurity, for that matter, they are instantly given a lead over other Linux distributions. If they can release closed source in the name of security, or under the veil of NDA's, or what have you, they are at an advantage over Caldera, SuSE, Corel, et al.
The question is, are the benefits of having closed source to the bottom line sufficient to justify the publicity of it. For Red Hat, the answer must be to the shareholders.
Selling software to the US Govt is a *real* nightmare. The GSA (General Services Administration) puts so many requirements on companies trying to sell directly to the government that it pays to team up with one of the companies founded to do this.
Red Hat will (probably) sell Linux to GTSI which will then turn around and sell it to the government (the same with service contracts, etc). That way Red Hat doesn't have to fill out the 100s of forms that poke into every nook and crany of their company (and GTSI already has them filled out).
At least that's how a software company I used to work for did it.
It is really nice to see that an institution as regulated as government is allowing use of Linux. My company (a large bank) has outlawed its use since it is a "hacker OS." I'm pleasantly surprised to see the government taking an interest.
The government's never put any restrictions on what operating systems we (federal IT folks) can use. There are already Linux installations all over the federal government (I run two of them). I'm sure there are some agencies where they want to exert more centralized control and try to dictate what OS's can be used, but luckily I'm not in one of those. If we need to set something up, and Linux is the easiest/best/fastest/cheapest way to do it, then we use Linux.
The only thing holding us back from using it more than we are is that I'm the only one who knows enough to set things up correctly.
Could that be a company as large as, say, American Express?
When I was there a couple years ago and official e-mail was sent out to put everyone on notice that *any* installation of Windows 98 would result in the immediate and non-negotiable termination of the offender.
Just two months later an IT guy was installing it on everyone's computer because it was the new standard.
debrain has an interesting idea about the closing-ness of Red Hat -- that they could base a certified distribution on Open Source, with certain key parts closed. That might be a HUGE (underlined, bolded, blinking and colored) success, because being Linux, it could be sold at a much better price than MS operating systems, and at a price that the traditional UNIX vendors wouldn't touch anyhow.
However, in point of fact, Red Hat has been accused-in-advance of being about to make that kind of move several times in the past few years -- even before the IPOgonzosity, people dropped dark hints about the Redmond-in-Waiting that was Red Hat.
Have they? I don't think so. Can anyone name an important contribution of Red Hat that has not been promptly released for the world (and Mandrake in particular) to play with? Instead, they've stuck with the idea that their worth is in a) reputation ["But boss, this isn't some no-name OS here -- this is genuine Red Hat Linux, with a box and everything!"] and b) Service ["And boss, it comes with good support options!"]
Now, things change and I don't have a crystal ball, but why shouldn't Red Hat decide that nothing succeeeds like success and continue their mile-a-second moves to shore themselves up as stalwart GPListas (in good humor, ok?) as well as Überkapitalists who are just tickled pink to sell your company as many copies of Linux, manuals, T-shirts and mousepads as you'd like?
Speaking as someone that just bought the "Standard" 6.1 package I was unimpressed with the "support". Specifically I found that the Reference Guide supplied by them in this $40 (after shipping) package was not great. Half of it consists of a list of packages - a real waste of paper that. The rest of the manual is IMHO poorly laid out and made for a damned confusing install - much inferior to RH5.2 from what I remember - a change to the boot and rescue disk procedure, a reference to a non-existent rescue.img on the CD and web-site. I hope that the more expensive packages provided better documentation. I'm not too keen on having to rely on web/phone based support. I'd rather have good documentation that lets me figure it out logically myself. That said, I wish them all the success with the Govt. markets. It's nice that they're getting recognition in new markets.
I work For the US Courts and our District has been using Linux for several years now. We have a Squid proxy, two brand new RH boxes running ColdFusion, a samba server, a security monitoring box, all told about 7 machines. We're also getting a new one for Domino. Many of the 92 districts use Linux because it's a stable and inexpensive alternantive to NT. Plus every court has a couple of Solaris boxes so the knowledge base for working with Linux is already there.
Some of the courts are starting to consider Linux for the desktop. Since we use WordPerfect and Netscape it's a perfect solution. I heard rummor that one small court has already moved over.
According to the article, this company will be the first to break into the Linux enterprise market. I fail to see why this is a major breakthrough - anyone can use Linux for their enterprise whenever and however they want. Linux has been used at my company for quite some time now as an database server with every bit of the HR, sales, and product records (regular backups are kept, of course).
Stating that this is a major 'new' market is just bull.
Here's an artcle [govtech.net] from Government Technology Magazine [govtech.net] about how states and local governments (read cities) are using open-source software like Linux and Apache to run Web severs, file servers, etc.
The article also touches on some of the obstacles government agencies face trying to purchase "free" software. As a bonus, you get a few comments from Slashdot's resident Apache expert Jim Jagielski.
Hipnerd
In the spirit full disclosure, I should probably mention that I wrote the article.
First of all, the certification is given for "platforms." This includes all the hardware and the operating system. NT 3.51 was certified on 3 different platforms. The key thing is that NT was only certified as an isolated machine. It can't even have a modem, let alone a network connection.
Secondly, I think NT 4.0 just got C2 certified, but I'm not sure on what hardware. I don't know if it can have external connections either, but I suspect not.
I think it means a new market for Linux companies. Before it was just government employees installing Linux on some boxes. Now it's government agencies buying Linux distros from RedHat complete with docs and support. That's what's new.
I am glad to see that Linux is getting into the goverment, but if you only knew how much of a beaurcratic mess the goverment was then you would wonder if this was really a good thing. The goverment has so many regulations on how they do business that it could inevitable leak over into how Redhat functions. I 'd just hate to see a good thing go bad..
Yes it did, but companies are slow to adopt, especially big companies.
When W2K comes out almost nobody will be rushing it into production. In fact, most people will probably wait a year before even thinking about betting the business.
Linux is just now on some companies' radars, and it will still be 2 years or more before large conservative institutions like banks even realize that Linux is an option. Right now they just shoot it down as a h4X0r OS. Eventually they will be rolling it out as part of their business. IBM supposedly has a 390 mainframe implementation. I wonder where that will eventually go.
Could that be a company as large as, say, American Express?
Probably on a par.
We are definitely going to use Linux someday because it is so great - it is just a matter of time. But until it has been thoroughly tested we can be terminated for installing it.
That meant I had to remove Redhat 5.2 from my company laptop despite the fact that it had run perfectly for months. I have asked repeatedly to be part of the testing, but that kind of fun is reserved for another site:-(
Basically, if I am not working with Linux in this company in 2000, I will probably be working with it somewhere else.
Not only does it have good legal support it also supports direct tie-ins to WestLaw and Lexis-Nexis. It also has better macro support than any other word proccessor. Add to that that it runs on Linux or Windows. Who could ask for anything more.
well, it looks like a win for us. we're looking at about 600-900 installs of our proprietary software in the Linux environment over the next couple years.
it was (and continues) to be a struggle to convince people it's a viable solution. The support issue comes up the most -- "who will support us if you're gone?"
funny thing is, all it takes is a few decent demos and their hearts turn. it is slowly becoming a viable alternative.
hopefully some decent openGL support and quality debuggers/profilers/gui builders will start floating down the pike soon.
Linux has been on the COTS list at some agencies for a long time. At my agency, it's approved for DNS servers "at boundary," although Win NT Server 4.0 is the primary platform. That doesn't explain why some poking around on our intranet reveals a number of sites with a decidedly counter(internal)culture feel. Y'know, sites where anyone can pick up a copy of Perl or Linux. Sites that display little "Best Viewed With vi" buttons. I get the feeling there's more penetration into the government market than anyone yet appreciates.
Still, on paper, M$ has a near-total monopoly around here. For example, the only authorized "web-maker" (direct quote from our official COTS list) software on our COTS list is FrontPage. Theoretically, I'm not allowed to edit my web pages in vi. At least I get a smile on my face every time I do.:-)
You stated things very well. I know from personal on the job experience. The situation was regretable to me, now I stay out of trouble and keep my mouth shut on new/inovative technologies. The situation has improved a little over the past decade, but has a long way to go.
There are many good hands-on TEK (Technology Experience and Knowledge) folks in Government Service (GS) who are ignored as non-team players when providing multiple options and questions as to what/where/when/how specifics on technology use (... VTC-H.324/H.323, VOIP-Circuit/Packet Switching, Bandwidth management IP/ATM, Cell Phones-Analog/Digital/1G/2G/3G).
Professional (hands-on, people that do... make it reality, not contract and paper pushers) GS Technolgy advisors/consultants are frequently pushed into the background during meetings, notified late in the acquestion process or after systems fielded about problems that need to be resolved by tomorrow, rated on their one/two minor (cost/impact) annual mistakes rather than their 101+ successes during the year. No respect, low pay,..., and the government wonders why the best of the GS TEK folks are going to the highest commercial market bidder and/or taking part-time (after hours, weekends, vacations) outside commercial Installation/consulting jobs. The best of the young leave and the older TEK folks stick around making a little retirement money on the side.
PLEASE, don't get me wrong there are some very good managers in GS and I enjoy (very much) who I support as a customer, but TEKs (Geeks old/young) are not respected and some Acquisitions and Logistics smoke-blowing folks who look great to higher-level managers cause come of these contracts, regulations, and policy problems.
TEK-Geeks (AKA: Worker-Bees a/o Pack-Mules by management) may look and act a bit different from the coat and tie desk-jockies, but (as a group) are always as professional as any desk-jockie or Lab-bit.
Just for the record, I meant free as in "open sourced," not free as in "costs no money."
I talked with some government officials who downloaded their software and others who felt that paying for it was worthwhile to gain access to support. Both points of view have some validity.
Yes- it most assuredly is according to the Administration's definition of COTS. I argue that it's not only COTS, but prevents a monopoly during the most expensive portion of any program- operation and maintenance. I wrote a paper on it (recently updated) which is available at http://www.penguinpowered.com/~seiferth. I urge you to drop this off on decision maker's desks. If we can get Linux on the GSA approved list and an approved Common Operating Environment platform, then there won't be any major hurdles to the government purchasing loads of Linux.
Big News, but then maybe not (Score:1)
Article doesn't say much (Score:1)
"Solid Choice" (Score:2)
Yes, indeed - as it is for all users.
Linux already enjoys a robust presence throughout the federal market, despite the common perception that it has yet to penetrate government IT shops.
It is really nice to see that an institution as regulated as government is allowing use of Linux. My company (a large bank) has outlawed its use since it is a "hacker OS." I'm pleasantly surprised to see the government taking an interest.
Government Contracts. (Score:3)
The most recent move has been toward COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) software. The real question is: is Open Source stuff COTS? The obvious answer is yes, but how do you convince someone who hasn't seen the real world since the 80's of this?
As and example of how wierd things get, someone periodically removes tcsh from our systems believing it to be "shareware" (and therefore not COTS). Since we all have
I don't envy anyone trying to introduce anything "new" or "innovative" or even "useful" to the government.
And now... (Score:2)
With all the money they save by using Linux rather than Windows, they can buy even more useless and extravagant stuff at the end of the year in order to keep their existing budget!
(I used to work at a federal agency, yes, they do that. I got a dual pentium II computer out of the deal, well, to use, at least. And that was when the Pentium chips ran over $700 EACH. They bought four of those computers...)
Hehe, it's sad. Bets that not one dollar will actually be saved. Just spent on stuff other than windows. Not like that's a bad thing...
Good Stuff (Score:1)
but as more and more IT workers start implementing
linux there will be a bigger demand for companies like this.
"The number one opportunity in the government
is on the server side and on the technical desktop,"
Makes me wonder if they will try to increase the
development of a general desktop
for all markets, Something Linux Could deffinatly use
.
Gentleman, you can't fight in here, this is the war room..
of course, this is to keep up with the Chinese... (Score:2)
Hey, Henry Baker said it [netcom.com], and he's, like, famous, or at least prolific [netcom.com], so he must be right!
So Uncle Sam now getting behind Linux. Do they realize the same trick won't work a second time? Do they underestimate the skill of Chinese programmers? Or ... I can't bear to contemplate the third possibility....
--
"But, Mulder, the new millennium doesn't begin until January 2001."
Re:Article doesn't say much (Score:2)
On the other hand, if Red Hat can spin off security through obscurity, or anything through obscurity, for that matter, they are instantly given a lead over other Linux distributions. If they can release closed source in the name of security, or under the veil of NDA's, or what have you, they are at an advantage over Caldera, SuSE, Corel, et al.
The question is, are the benefits of having closed source to the bottom line sufficient to justify the publicity of it. For Red Hat, the answer must be to the shareholders.
Re:Article doesn't say much (Score:1)
The fact that NT4.0 has just hit the end of its 'shelf-life' and is being replaced by NT2000 (of course not yet certified
Re:Government Contracts. (Score:2)
Red Hat will (probably) sell Linux to GTSI which will then turn around and sell it to the government (the same with service contracts, etc). That way Red Hat doesn't have to fill out the 100s of forms that poke into every nook and crany of their company (and GTSI already has them filled out).
At least that's how a software company I used to work for did it.
Re:"Solid Choice" (Score:2)
The government's never put any restrictions on what operating systems we (federal IT folks) can use. There are already Linux installations all over the federal government (I run two of them). I'm sure there are some agencies where they want to exert more centralized control and try to dictate what OS's can be used, but luckily I'm not in one of those. If we need to set something up, and Linux is the easiest/best/fastest/cheapest way to do it, then we use Linux.
The only thing holding us back from using it more than we are is that I'm the only one who knows enough to set things up correctly.
FYI on GTSI (Score:1)
Re:FYI on GTSI (Score:1)
Re:"Solid Choice" (Score:2)
When I was there a couple years ago and official e-mail was sent out to put everyone on notice that *any* installation of Windows 98 would result in the immediate and non-negotiable termination of the offender.
Just two months later an IT guy was installing it on everyone's computer because it was the new standard.
Never say never!
Red hat and closingness (Score:3)
However, in point of fact, Red Hat has been accused-in-advance of being about to make that kind of move several times in the past few years -- even before the IPOgonzosity, people dropped dark hints about the Redmond-in-Waiting that was Red Hat.
Have they? I don't think so. Can anyone name an important contribution of Red Hat that has not been promptly released for the world (and Mandrake in particular) to play with? Instead, they've stuck with the idea that their worth is in a) reputation ["But boss, this isn't some no-name OS here -- this is genuine Red Hat Linux, with a box and everything!"] and b) Service ["And boss, it comes with good support options!"]
Now, things change and I don't have a crystal ball, but why shouldn't Red Hat decide that nothing succeeeds like success and continue their mile-a-second moves to shore themselves up as stalwart GPListas (in good humor, ok?) as well as Überkapitalists who are just tickled pink to sell your company as many copies of Linux, manuals, T-shirts and mousepads as you'd like?
Just thoughts,
timothy
Hmmm... (Score:1)
redhat support (Score:1)
No Big Suprise (Score:3)
I work For the US Courts and our District has been using Linux for several years now. We have a Squid proxy, two brand new RH boxes running ColdFusion, a samba server, a security monitoring box, all told about 7 machines. We're also getting a new one for Domino. Many of the 92 districts use Linux because it's a stable and inexpensive alternantive to NT. Plus every court has a couple of Solaris boxes so the knowledge base for working with Linux is already there.
Some of the courts are starting to consider Linux for the desktop. Since we use WordPerfect and Netscape it's a perfect solution. I heard rummor that one small court has already moved over.
Or... (Score:2)
Linux in the enterprise? (Score:2)
According to the article, this company will be the first to break into the Linux enterprise market. I fail to see why this is a major breakthrough - anyone can use Linux for their enterprise whenever and however they want. Linux has been used at my company for quite some time now as an database server with every bit of the HR, sales, and product records (regular backups are kept, of course).
Stating that this is a major 'new' market is just bull.
Local government are already using Linux (Score:2)
The article also touches on some of the obstacles government agencies face trying to purchase "free" software. As a bonus, you get a few comments from Slashdot's resident Apache expert Jim Jagielski.
Hipnerd
In the spirit full disclosure, I should probably mention that I wrote the article.
Black Flag Linux (Score:2)
more to that... (Score:2)
First of all, the certification is given for "platforms." This includes all the hardware and the operating system. NT 3.51 was certified on 3 different platforms. The key thing is that NT was only certified as an isolated machine. It can't even have a modem, let alone a network connection.
Secondly, I think NT 4.0 just got C2 certified, but I'm not sure on what hardware. I don't know if it can have external connections either, but I suspect not.
Re:Linux in the enterprise? (Score:2)
I think it means a new market for Linux companies. Before it was just government employees installing Linux on some boxes. Now it's government agencies buying Linux distros from RedHat complete with docs and support. That's what's new.
yes but do they really want that (Score:2)
yes I am a pesimist
send flames > /dev/null
Re:I can't wait (Score:1)
Yeah, it's going to be awesome to see Bill Gates go from $100 Billion to a measly faction of his previous wealth. I'll be laughing so hard.
Re:"Solid Choice" (Score:1)
When W2K comes out almost nobody will be rushing it into production. In fact, most people will probably wait a year before even thinking about betting the business.
Linux is just now on some companies' radars, and it will still be 2 years or more before large conservative institutions like banks even realize that Linux is an option. Right now they just shoot it down as a h4X0r OS. Eventually they will be rolling it out as part of their business. IBM supposedly has a 390 mainframe implementation. I wonder where that will eventually go.
Re: This is Obvious Flamebait (Score:1)
'nuff said. i don't really like irix either, but it does have the goods for SMP.
jon
Re:"Solid Choice" (Score:1)
Probably on a par.
We are definitely going to use Linux someday because it is so great - it is just a matter of time. But until it has been thoroughly tested we can be terminated for installing it.
That meant I had to remove Redhat 5.2 from my company laptop despite the fact that it had run perfectly for months. I have asked repeatedly to be part of the testing, but that kind of fun is reserved for another site :-(
Basically, if I am not working with Linux in this company in 2000, I will probably be working with it somewhere else.
Re:Big News, but then maybe not (Score:1)
Another unlikelihood from the archives of
I'd bet the following are larger than the US Government:
1. The Indian Government (India has 4x as many people, and is famous for it's bureaucracy)
2. The Mafia. What can I say. International in scope, beyond the touch of any government.
3. The Chinese Government - duh! - a HUGE standing army, plus all the apparachiks implicit in commounism. The mind wobbles.
Re:No Big Suprise (Score:1)
Linux In Government (Score:1)
it was (and continues) to be a struggle to convince people it's a viable solution. The support issue comes up the most -- "who will support us if you're gone?"
funny thing is, all it takes is a few decent demos and their hearts turn. it is slowly becoming a viable alternative.
hopefully some decent openGL support and quality debuggers/profilers/gui builders will start floating down the pike soon.
Re:Government Contracts. (Score:1)
Still, on paper, M$ has a near-total monopoly around here. For example, the only authorized "web-maker" (direct quote from our official COTS list) software on our COTS list is FrontPage. Theoretically, I'm not allowed to edit my web pages in vi. At least I get a smile on my face every time I do.
Re:Government Contracts. (Score:1)
There are many good hands-on TEK (Technology Experience and Knowledge) folks in Government Service (GS) who are ignored as non-team players when providing multiple options and questions as to what/where/when/how specifics on technology use (... VTC-H.324/H.323, VOIP-Circuit/Packet Switching, Bandwidth management IP/ATM, Cell Phones-Analog/Digital/1G/2G/3G).
Professional (hands-on, people that do
PLEASE, don't get me wrong there are some very good managers in GS and I enjoy (very much) who I support as a customer, but TEKs (Geeks old/young) are not respected and some Acquisitions and Logistics smoke-blowing folks who look great to higher-level managers cause come of these contracts, regulations, and policy problems.
TEK-Geeks (AKA: Worker-Bees a/o Pack-Mules by management) may look and act a bit different from the coat and tie desk-jockies, but (as a group) are always as professional as any desk-jockie or Lab-bit.
Re:Yep we sure are. (Score:1)
I talked with some government officials who downloaded their software and others who felt that paying for it was worthwhile to gain access to support. Both points of view have some validity.
Hipnerd
Is Open Source COTS? (Score:1)
Justin