New South Wales Traffic Authority Switches to Macs 350
MacGyver writes ""In what may well be Apple Computer's largest coup in the Australian enterprise space, the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) will deploy 1200 G4 iMacs across 140 registry offices." This isn't just a Mac story: the RTA statement noted, "The Apple rollout is a continuation of RTA usage of open standards-based software and systems. The further adoption of open source is being undertaken to provide more choice of vendors and to guarantee RTA systems are providing value for money."
Providing more vendor options? (Score:2, Insightful)
thats like saying your moving from california to idaho for a better selection of produce.
Ummm... (Score:0, Insightful)
I mean, no offense to Apple fans out there... Apple's niche of success is BUILT on having complete control over their hardware... Wouldn't a Linux or *BSD solution, ultimately, be what they should have gone with?
Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ummm... (Score:2, Insightful)
Mac's prices are based on the fact that you have a stable system because, again, they control the hardware. If their goal was truely as stated, buying 'off-the-shelf' parts and installing Linux/*BSD would be just as effective and far cheaper...
Re:Providing more vendor options? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Providing more vendor options? (Score:2, Insightful)
They're 64 bit, though. And just as proprietary and single-company-sourced.
Both are the wrong choice if you want the most vendor options.
funny. (Score:5, Insightful)
The irony here is, there wouldn't be a mac/apple story if it weren't for Apple having gone to OS X and a more open software philosophy. It looks like, were it not for open source, much of the revitalization that Apple has undergone in the wake of OS X would not have occured, and "Apple is dying!" would be all over slashdot - as it as prior to OS X. Haven't seen those trolls for a while, so maybe it's telling.
Of course, now there'll be 15 replies with, "Apple is dying!" or "BSD is dying!" or such, just to spite me.
the 'openness" of Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
My guess why they went for Apple is probably because Darwin is bassed on BSD and the source is available. It may not be open in the sence that Linux is but it is more open then Microsoft ever will be.
Also, with Apple meing a majoe vendor they have a certain sence of security when it coemes to future support. Apple have a better chance of sticking around than some shop making custom Linux boxes
Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right about most of your other points, but don't hold the ancient history of deliberately closed hardware at Apple against them in this day and age.
Re:Ummm... (Score:2, Insightful)
They ported in a FreeBSD userland to provide the core userland. They planted it on top of a Mach kernel based on NextOS, a proprietary closed-source OS. They piled on top a GUI layer that is closed source.
Saying MacOS is 'based on FreeBSD' is like claiming a Windows 2000 machine is 'based on GTK' because you installed the Win32 port of the gimp on it.
Re:Who the fuck cares? (Score:5, Insightful)
-B
What value? (Score:5, Insightful)
As Han Solo once said... (Score:5, Insightful)
Stability is a tricky thing - just like vendor relationships. Apple knows their hardware as well as their software. Whenever I hear the word, "Custom", as it relates to a large project like this, I cringe.
Does 'Custom' mean that you never have to:
- Patch it?
- Update various included software?
- Include new hardware support?
Of course not! Even if you're not paying for the software, you're going to have pay for the support for the software - however you figure it. Just ask IBM - that's their new business model. Think their customers are getting off any cheaper than Apple's? Don't bet on it.
Re:Ummm... (Score:1, Insightful)
Thanks for being on the Internet, I sure appreciate the extra spam.
Re:Ummm... (Score:5, Insightful)
If their data is cross-platform, then it doesn't matter if they are using Macs, Linux or glorified iPods..they are not "locked in" to a particular vendor.
So why choose Macs? Maybe for them it was a lower TOC. Maybe for them it is easier to get a locked down system for iMacs. Maybe they just want their offices to look nicer? Who knows..maybe the question was answered in the article...
Re:If they really wanted value... (Score:5, Insightful)
Going with Apple gives them the ability to run OSS software on top of a supported, performant, supported, off the shelf platform. It reduces the risk and is therefore a good thing from a taxpayers point of view.
The cheaper hardware isn't a big deal here either. As a government agency they would have to go with a big supplier, one that's going to be able to supply and support them and has a track record of doing so. When you are dealing with these volumes I would guess that the Apple kit won't come in much more expensive than say Dell or HP etc.
Re:Providing more vendor options? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but what other computer can double as a lamp? :)
While OS X is not as open as, say, Linux, it is more open than Windows. Unlike other options like Solaris, it can play nice in Windows environments, and most of the time can read Windows formats. While Linux can do this, it takes more work to get Linux to do this. Since these machines are destined for decentralized offices, ease of use is probably a must.
Re:WHAT? (Score:3, Insightful)
Um HELLO!!!! (I copied that bit off your post)...proprietary computers don't cause lock in....proprietary data formats do. If the data is OS/hardware agnostic, it hardly matters what hardware they use on the desktop.
If using Macs helps with that transition (remember they probably need MS Office) then lucky Apple - they make a sale.
Good, yet bad. (Score:5, Insightful)
That being said, the Macs are a better choice when compared to PC's... they might be a bit more expensive up front, but the build quality is excellent and people find them easier to use, so the cost of maintaining and supporting them is going to be lower.
One of the interesting things in the article is that they can use the swivel mount to show people their license photos easily. Pretty nifty.
Of course, I have no idea about why they made the decision because I don't work there - I also live across the border in SA.
Re:Ummm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ummm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, since when does off the shelf hardware not have a warranty?
Seriously, something like this is planned, they can buy in bulk and it is most definitely less expensive both in the short term and long term. There is no comparison on price so find another point to argueRe:Ummm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ummm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, I can buy hdds in units of 50-500, even 1000 no problem. I am covered under an enterprise warranty. If a drive goes bad I ship it off to Maxtor or whoever I choose to go with after learning the environment they will live. Its not different from any other setting where you buy the computer whole. You're argument over space is irrelevent as well since there are both monitors and cases designed to be like Macs. If you assume the software is free and the computers themselves cost less then where do you figure Macs cost less in any run. Seriously, the argument has been made they use the same types of components so how would a new G4 or G5 hold its value compared to a normal PC? It won't, Apple gave that up when they stopped using scsi in all their machines.
As for numbers on the support agreements, they would be useless since such a thing would rely on information I don't have, such as, do they want the support team to manage the hardware as well? Do they want the support team to ensure upgrades are done when a new product is available? Depending on their needs the price will change a lot. But its still a hell of a lot less than the cost of a support call to Apple.
Re:Providing more vendor options? (Score:5, Insightful)
more or less all of the big commercial software
lots of high quality shareware & freeware
most of the open source software with a recompile or via fink
a Unix that even your grandmother can use
not on Windows, not on Linux
I can run Microsoft office, while browsing the web using Lynx in a Terminal Window, use Adobe's great software and also run KDE, KOffice (betas recompiled using the native QT port now even run natively and don't require X11) and all the other goodies (btw even MPlayer is better on OS X http://mplayerosx.sf.net)
Re:What value? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Providing more vendor options? (Score:2, Insightful)
surprise surprise (Score:3, Insightful)
Which shows a lot of people who shout RTFM all day are above RTFA. I think it's pretty cool to see macs deployed in open source situations. Best of two worlds and such...
The funniest posts of course are in the vein of "they should of called my cousin Ned" (translated from "build yourself").
Which shows a lot of people don't know what "Cost" and "Cost of ownership" and associated factors are.
Even with Apple's recent track record, I doubt self-built kits will outlive a bunch of macs without blowing some fuses and minds, but whatever.
I think the appropriate response to Apple and NSW TA would be "Good on ye, mate!"