Navy Paying Millions To Keep Running Windows XP

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
This seems like a perfectly acceptable use of taxpayer money. Seriously though, how long has the Navy been paying Microsoft to continue support for Windows XP?

The US Navy has agreed to pay Microsoft at least $9m to help secure computers running Windows XP as it did not replaced the aged OS before support ended. The deal will see Microsoft provide critical hotfixes and software patches for Windows XP, Office 2003, Exchange 2003 and Server 2003 for a maximum of three years. The navy runs a number of "legacy applications" that require Windows XP, which it is in the process of replacing.
Click to expand...
 
Funny thing is, they are probably paying Microsof tall this money for hotfixes they likely already need to make for XP Embedded which is still in active support :rolleyes:
 
I know this will seem counter intuitive but this is a lot cheaper then replacing these systems if they provide what is needed.
 
Some critical applications can't make the jump to Win7+, especially to 64bits.

We have the same problem here at work with system developped in the early 2000 that are still in use to control hardware that were custom built at the time. Those system will continue to run for the lifespan of those pieces of hardware.

As long as it works....
 
Oh forgot to mention the F-35 will cost the same if not more...................
 
Romale23 said:
I know this will seem counter intuitive but this is a lot cheaper then replacing these systems if they provide what is needed.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was thinking the same thing, how many computers does the US Navy have? What would it cost to put Windows (whatever edition) on all of them? I mean sure could do the Chinese government and just pirate all the copies.

Just hope their software does not work unless it's fully updated, I can see some naval base that got too lazy to install updates, hits cancel whenever is prompted, and oh gee that's why China has an Aegis cruiser type ship now.
 
So since they are spending our money, maybe the patches should be released to the US?
 
BloodyIron said:
They really should just switch to Linux. More secure, and less costly.
Click to expand...

assuming you have the support structure in place to keep linux running smoothly.....

cost is not just about the up-front cost of the software, but the costs of supporting it as well.
 
Steve said:
This seems like a perfectly acceptable use of taxpayer money. Seriously though, how long has the Navy been paying Microsoft to continue support for Windows XP?
Click to expand...

Answer: too long. I'm currently working on the long overdue project to replace all of the EOL software/hardware in the fleet. We just started testing in April.
 
xXaNaXx said:
assuming you have the support structure in place to keep linux running smoothly.....

cost is not just about the up-front cost of the software, but the costs of supporting it as well.
Click to expand...

Linux is ultimately more stable than XP and the government could hire literally hundreds of coders to maintain it for the cost MS is inducing.

On the other hand, why they don't pull the ethernet plug on the XP systems and forget updates. Beats me.
 
Probably costs four times more or higher if they migrate to a newer OS with associated labor, new equipment purchase, disposition of old equipment, rewrite legacy apps, QA, hire more managers and support staff, etc.
 
ITT: People who thinks it's easy to switch to a new OS to computers for the largest Navy in the world by a factor of 2. Also ITT: People who think $9 million is anywhere close to expensive and don't realize that's only the cost of 9 days of operating a single aircraft carrier.
 
So typical of the linux haters, always a negative answer.

So, they can't move to anything but XP, so what, keep paying microcrap forever and ever?

No, eventually, they need to move to something, so might as well, do it now and be done with it. Be linux or another version of winblows.

The only way to "justify" this payment is that they are already moving to something else and are not ready, but paying just to keep using XP, is a waste of money.

Then again, money wasted by our government is nothing new.
 
grtitan said:
So typical of the linux haters, always a negative answer.

So, they can't move to anything but XP, so what, keep paying microcrap forever and ever?

No, eventually, they need to move to something, so might as well, do it now and be done with it. Be linux or another version of winblows.

The only way to "justify" this payment is that they are already moving to something else and are not ready, but paying just to keep using XP, is a waste of money.

Then again, money wasted by our government is nothing new.
Click to expand...

I'm a huge Microsoft fan. Using Linux here makes a lot of sense. The applications would need ported, but once that was done, it'd be easy to maintain. As they are going to be upgrading anyway, might as well plan to avoid this same situation down the road. Fix it now while they can.
 
This is bad....lol....I mean XP is very good, but that's gotta be costing a lot!
 
If Microsoft is providing security fixes for XP to the Navy then XP is not really EOL and it is just a fabrication to get people to upgrade to a newer version of Windows.
 
nutzo said:
I'm sure Linux will be great from running Office and Exchange.....
Click to expand...

Except those will run on Windows 7, 8, 10... The legacy applications that are holding them onto Windows XP 32-bit could be ported to Linux. The other PC's could run Windows all day. Those specialized systems could run Linux.
 
I wonder how long until someone "acquires" said hotfixes and patches and posts them up so half the globe can keep using XP.
 
Wizard220 said:
Each Raptor is over 350 million "EACH"/ That's PER PLANE.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5TgcilSwms&index=8&list=PL5HHhz3qoOS-56GRZLp1Z7Y8UmD1vhdzx
Click to expand...

Depends entirely on how you calculate the cost.

If you're rolling up the R&D, testing, retrofitting, capital construction expenditures, materials and labor, then 350m is about right. Considering the F-22 ended production in 2012, I think it's fair to tally it this way.

However, if we were to get into an air war with a viable adversary that was depleting our air superiority fleet (fat chance) and needed to mass produce more F-22's, just the materials and labor for getting 1 plane out of the factory in the current block configuration, 150m would be about right.
 
This is not news. The military in many ways uses outdated schemes because they always tend to allocate the money they have for projects which are new and shiny, with the rest being put into human capital.

There was an article last week of certain schools in the US using 1980s computer systems to control the AC inside buildings...yes you read that right 1980s which are a size of closets (no they are not servers)

The government sectors are always going to be screwed in one way or another. Whether its paying millions upon millions designing a website which a private company can do for thousands, or running old systems that most people have been trained on. In their eyes its far easier to pay money they dont have to remain doing what they do, vs. paying even more money dont have to improve efficiency and train people.

Bureaucracy is a bitch.
 
Igroock said:
This is not news. The military in many ways uses outdated schemes because they always tend to allocate the money they have for projects which are new and shiny, with the rest being put into human capital.
Click to expand...

There is a kind of reason to this: It's expensive to develop weapons systems, but it's far more expensive to develop, deploy, and maintain weapons systems constantly for decades.

If a global conflict were to break out (and our woeful cyber security didn't doom us during the opening salvo), we might be able ramp up mass production of one of the many designs that were developed but never mass produced. Depending on the adversary and location we would be able to choose the equipment we wanted rather than going in with equipment we had on hand.

The downside? Anything less than WW3 and we're sending men to fight in near-antiques.

Bottom line: Skynet wins with the opening salvo. Or whatever the symbol for Skynet is in mandarin. :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top