Navy staying with XP

http://www.itworld.com/article/2939...millions-to-stay-on-windows-xp.html?nsdr=true

XP does everything they need and the transition to 7 may actually be dangerous as well as expensive. If you don't think changing OS's on weapon control systems is dangerous, think a bit more. Too bad MS knows this and is gouging them heavily on support pricing.

 

I'd be curious to see any sources that say XP runs weapon systems.

Considering custom support hits a max of 2 million a year for XP alone, I'd say the Navy got quite a discount.

They paid 9 million for 10 years for XP, Exchnage 2003 and Office 2003.



That's a smoking deal.

I cost 155 an hour for custom development.

That is bottom end for what it costs in my industry. Now imagine a full team supporting 100k computers with three different complex software packages for the next 10 years.

With a small team of 50, that's at a cost of 1.24 million per month of work. That assumes they are charging bottom dollar costs per hour. I'd say 9 million is a steal. That's ~468 bucks an hour, or 75k a month. You and I both know that MS will have an easy 25-50 people assigned to the Navy. For a team of 50, that is barely minimum wage.

 

I assume you read the article.
The only thing MS is supporting is security patches, no "desktop" support. Given how many contracts like this MS has and the "security patch only" caveat I beg to differ on how cheap this is.

As far as what XP actually runs, we transport this stuff for the Navy. I can say Win 7 will never work with this hardware unless they do a full re-write. Serves them right for going with MS IMO. The systems that run on OS's that guarantee compatibility through upgrades are not having these problems.

 

When I say support, I am referring to developer support.

You can beg to differ on the price all you like but if you look at custom support for XP alone in costs, you will see I an right.

 

I can not even count how many times XP and other systems have been hacked multiple times.It's not that hard to do.

It only takes the right mind to create a annoying issue to piss off the Navers.

 

I would comment about this, but I can't. I think I can in about 8 more years.

 

Hopefully the Navy in 8 years will have learned an embedded firmware ROM based OS is more secure than software. There is no need for these systems to be updated, and remote administration is just plain dangerous.
Nah, What am I thinking? They will always listen to greedy developers.

 

Who are you referring to as greedy developers?

 

Eh, if you guys think Microsoft convinced them to stick with XP, I also got some ocean front property in AZ for sale. Good price too.

Microsoft also has embedded systems. Embedded systems do not mean that they don't need to receive updates.

Again, I really doubt the systems in question are running weapons. There might be XP clients might be logging into some interface, but they are just that, clients.

 

Greedy Developers are the ones that sell UN-needed "features".
We have systems that were designed from the ground up to do one thing well. The controls are on ROMs and most have no updates in 20 years. The control programs outlive the hardware. This is a terrible thing to a developer that wants a steady income from updates.
Can't have it both ways Adry, if the clients are unable to change the system there is no problem and XP is fine. Or XP can update the system and is a problem. The Navy wants security for XP, enough said.
You might re-read the Stuxnet articles?

 

I don't think you understand development as well as you think you do. What you are discussing is a custom developed solution. Custom solutions are very good at what they do, but nothing else. They also cost a lot more up front than off the shelf solutions.

The biggest reason that off the shelf solutions are used is because pencil pushing management sees $$ in the now, not overall. Greedy developers never enters into the equation. On top of that, developers aren't the one selling solutions, salespeople are. This is the same story it always has been. Microsoft has no interest in keeping the Navy on XP. It simply does not have the security needed, and it cannot get it without a major architecture overhaul (see 7 and up).

The fact is, they want support for XP, Exchange, and Office. It hardly sounds like a weapon system to me. It sounds like they need custom support for their clerical machines because they have not yet updated.

Embedded OSes arent the answer either. Look no further than Target and Home Depot to see why that is.

Just to reiterate a point. Microsoft isn't being greedy if they are offering a 30 million dollar support contract at only 9 million.

As for Stuxnet...there are plenty of software packages that protect from it without any assistance from Microsoft.

 

Agreed. Who knows what OS the US Navy is really using for their weapon control systems. Why tell the World? Unless it's a decoy... or an invite.

 

Thats a very good point.

 

"I don't think you understand development as well as you think you do"
Maybe I don't, but they pay me a LOT to do it.
I get my hands dirty, program on the metal and physically isolate it. Pretty hard to hack code you don't know and cannot access. Usually not one update or change in years of use. I don't embed someone else's OS, although I do use public libraries.

Security has a price and as you said modern managers are not willing to pay for it. Instead they listen to the salesmen of developers that know full well they cannot secure their systems 100%. They are initially cheap and easy to support, just not secure and long lasting.

Developing mission critical applications should not be the same as programming for an office or art gallery. But, as you know, I mostly do cranes.

 

For the exact reasons you mentioned is why I said I do not believe these to be anything more than clerical machines and clients.

I think they pay you a lot to work on software and maybe even code for it, but the actual development process is a much farther reaching subject that starts with customer requirements, meetings, etc. When I said I do not believe you understand it as well as you think, I didn't mean any offense, just that you are missing what happens during that initial planning phase when a client decides to go off the shelf or custom. Developers don't make those decisions. In all actuality, a greedy developer tries to get them to go custom every time, even if its not a good idea or fit for the client needs. They keep the source code and make the client 100% reliable on them for future guaranteed functionality. Plus they spend an ungodly amount of money building it.

For something like cranes, it absolutely should be a closed custom proprietary system. Microsoft hasn't been involved with stuff like that until just recently with IoT. Windows 10 IoT behaves how you would expect it to for stuff like that but even then isn't really for mission critical things.

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/Library/Windows/Hardware/dn914597.aspx
https://ms-iot.github.io/content/en-US/GetStarted.htm

Windows XP was never designed or intended for mission critical things, nor will Windows 7 8, 8.1, or 10. These are desktop OSes and are for end user PCs. I think the Navy knows this but it takes a long time to upgrade 100k machines, and they obviously have higher priority things to deal with. If the Navy averages 500-1k per machine, the hardware alone will be 50-100 million dollars. That doesn't even take into consideration the man hours needed. 9 million seems a lot more desirable at that point.

 

Nice post Adry, I will say these Navy systems are mostly clerical, but some are programmers for systems that should be secure. Hence the need for some security effort.
Since Windows is not the target the game is changed. Some of the flaws in XP are probably still in 10.
https://threatpost.com/patched-windows-machines-exposed-to-stuxnet-lnk-flaw-all-along/111558
There probably isn't a good all around solution. Constant vigilance is their best bet for security.

 

I wholeheartedly agree.

 

Completely unrelated: Like the new avatar, Adryn.

 

Thanks

I suffered through the last 11 months to get it (first test was July 2014, last two were this month), so I figured I might as well use the logos they gave me.

The pat on the back I also received didn't convert to an image

Its the electronic equivalent of "I went to <insert place> and all I got was this lousy t-shirt."

 

Still off topic..
Adry, you did not mention the expense. When I started MS classes with NT 3.5 I thought that was bad, now there are a lot more certifications and they cost a lot more each.
Kudos for sticking with it.

 

Thank you for the support. My company fronted the costs (1 class, three tests, 3 grand overall). I only had to pay if I failed.

So I lucked out there.

 

I believe the word you were looking for is "incentive"

 

Thanks folks

 

Back on topic...
I think we can all agree. The US Navy, probably the most sophisticated and efficient Naval Force in the world, doesn't use the Windows XP I have on my PC. And even I don't connect to the internet, or use USB devices with storage, or load CDs or DVDs while using WinXP. And the US Navy has a lot more brain power than I do... maybe... :-o

Adrynalyne, for a split second I read your new location as IED... roflmao

 

Are you implying I am explosive around people?

 

I don't ever imply or assume...
And I think I can safely say... neither do you. :-D

And, again, congrats on a great Microsoft qualification. :dood

 

Why, do you eat beans?

 

Only when my wife makes me angry.

 

Only certain people... :innocent

 

We have a couple of boxes from Fry's of XP Pro for Navy installs. Nothing special except some configuration. Some of the Navy does not want an image install, they demand a CD fresh install. But in the end it's the same XP you have.

 

Somehow I suspect it only starts out that way...

 

I doubt it. My Windows XP looks a lot better...

 

Well, my grand kids are cuter!
Honestly, Mimsy there is only configuration changes. If you remember the pirated Tiny7 windows you will know how many services can be turned off.