Microsoft just made millions from Windows XP

[othertomperson]

And I really doubt they are saving ANY money by doing that. Because you still need a company to develop linux.

 

They've done it because of the NSA, not because it's free.

[Arty]

It is ok The Us Gov Bought us all windows 10

[ben dover kid]

$9 million is not that much. It costs the US airforce almost $100 million to develop a single jet plane.

well ya know that 9m is absolutely poop to microsoft, and to us army. the lastest f35 hornet development cost was 60billion dollars. that is quite a lot. 100 million they gonna just wipe their asses with. 100m dollars is the cost of one f35 hornet. us army plans to buy almost 2500 of those hornets. take that.

[dalekphalm]

well ya know that 9m is absolutely poop to microsoft, and to us army. the lastest f35 hornet development cost was 60billion dollars. that is quite a lot. 100 million they gonna just wipe their asses with. 100m dollars is the cost of one f35 hornet. us army plans to buy almost 2500 of those hornets. take that.

Just an FYI, the F-35 is not the "Hornet".

 

The Hornet, also known as the F-18 Hornet (Or F/A-18 Hornet, or CF-18 Hornet to us Canadians), is a totally different, and much older Strike Fighter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hornet

 

The F-35's codename is "Lightning II":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

EDIT:

Fun fact, the original "Lightning", also made by Lockheed, was a WW2 fighter plane, the P-38 Lightning:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning

[ben dover kid]

Just an FYI, the F-35 is not the "Hornet".

 

The Hornet, also known as the F-18 Hornet (Or F/A-18 Hornet, or CF-18 Hornet to us Canadians), is a totally different, and much older Strike Fighter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hornet

 

The F-35's codename is "Lightning II":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

 

EDIT:

Fun fact, the original "Lightning", also made by Lockheed, was a WW2 fighter plane, the P-38 Lightning:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning

ik its lockheed, but i see no reason to start being fancy with stuff, if i say f35 and refer it as a hornet everyone should understand. my point was the cost

[dalekphalm]

ik its lockheed, but i see no reason to start being fancy with stuff, if i say f35 and refer it as a hornet everyone should understand. my point was the cost

My point is that if part of your information is completely, 100% verifiably false, then it brings into question the validity of the rest of your information - which you don't provide a source for anyway.

 

The cost figures you post sound accurate, and probably are accurate. But this is a tech forum. We should state accurate info.

 

That's like me referring to the "GTX GM200 Titan X" as the "GTX GM200 Fury X".

 

So forgive me for correcting your incorrect information. Try not to take it personally

[Misanthrope]

Linux Support is actually just as - if not even more - expensive compared to Windows Support.

 

That's one of the reasons why the major Linux Distros can offer a free version, is because Support Contracts cost extra, where they are included with the cost of Windows/Windows Server.

 

Not to mention good Linux SysAdmins are costly to employ.

 

Linux isn't "magically free" for corporations/governments/government agencies. Sure, there's no upfront purchase cost, but there are a ton of other costs many people don't think about.

 

For starters, the cost of retraining 100,000 people to use Linux - most of which, have probably never touched a Linux computer in their life (Not counting Android, since it's so fundamentally different on the UI side of things). Next you've got the support contract, the cost of employing good specialized Linux IT personnel, etc.

 

In the grand scheme of things, the cost Linux vs Microsoft for a corporation, isn't really very different.

 

The cost of IT professionals and training personnel is true for both sides so don't be disingenuous about it. More over, there are way more concerns that the world is finally waking up to post Edward Snowden which makes open source kind of necessary for organizations needing to keep high levels of security and confidentiality like non-us based government agencies which are quickly moving to Linux and open source out of necessity.

[dalekphalm]

The cost of IT professionals and training personnel is true for both sides so don't be disingenuous about it. More over, there are way more concerns that the world is finally waking up to post Edward Snowden which makes open source kind of necessary for organizations needing to keep high levels of security and confidentiality like non-us based government agencies which are quickly moving to Linux and open source out of necessity.

True enough, some organizations have to consider that aspect more heavily now. And running a Windows environment will always be costly.

I was just pointing out a well known problem that industry professionals face when dealing with cost and time management of whether to migrate or not.

[Misanthrope]

True enough, some organizations have to consider that aspect more heavily now. And running a Windows environment will always be costly.

I was just pointing out a well known problem that industry professionals face when dealing with cost and time management of whether to migrate or not.

Migration involves costs yes but in the case of maintaining expensive licenses with Microsoft and Oracle and such, that could also quickly add up to the costs. The only other point to consider is that migration is not a factor if the infrastructure and personnel start with Linux from the get go, which does happen under certain environments and enterprises.

[alextulu]

 

The Navy relies on a number of legacy applications and programs that are reliant on legacy Windows products

 

What ?  I thought that Windows was all about backwards compatibility with older programs. Why is it that I can play games that were compiled for Windows XP on Windows 7, but the military has problems with their Windows XP programs ?  I've even seen somebody using Office 97 on Windows 8.

[dalekphalm]

What ?  I thought that Windows was all about backwards compatibility with older programs. Why is it that I can play games that were compiled for Windows XP on Windows 7, but the military has problems with their Windows XP programs ?  I've even seen somebody using Office 97 on Windows 8.

You obviously haven't used that many Legacy programs.

 

Some will "just work" on Windows 7 or newer. These, are the lucky ones. Windows Vista had heavy parts of the NT kernel re-written, and every OS since has been based off the NT 6.0 kernel that was Vista.

 

Many programs will have only partial functionality. Some may install, and even open up. But one function might be broken ... or multiple functions.

 

Some will install, but won't launch. Even in "Compatibility mode", which is shitty pseudo emulation at best, and not a real solution.

 

And then some programs flat out won't even install, or will randomly fail partway through the process.

 

Just because you've had good experience running Legacy programs, really doesn't mean anything. It's anecdotal evidence. I've personally seen many programs - especially highly specialized technical ones - that flat out will not run on Windows 7. Half of the most popular PLC Programming applications, for example, pretty much require Windows XP, either in part (usually, the download/upload process to the PLC itself does not work in Windows 7), or in full, where the program won't even load.

[Carde]

Considering the main supply/logistics/pricing/control and well in fact just the one program that makes the business possible for where I work dates back to the 80ties and is only now SLOWLY being replaced I can't say I am to surprised.

 

The problem is that if it is not broken why fix it, if a system works and is proven reliable than there is no incentive to change it and doing so could make it less reliable and that is a huge deal.

[Ceatra]

looks like the Navy isn't very XPerienced with Operating Systems (see what I did there?)

[alextulu]

Half of the most popular PLC Programming applications, for example, pretty much require Windows XP, either in part (usually, the download/upload process to the PLC itself does not work in Windows 7), or in full, where the program won't even load.

 

Maybe the problem here is not the program itself, but the driver that comes with the program.

[LukaP]

$9 million is not that much. It costs the US airforce almost $100 million to develop a single jet plane.

Buy* 

 

development is in billions. even a HEAT missile for the javelin launcher (only the missile) costs upwards of 10 mio dollars

[dalekphalm]

Maybe the problem here is not the program itself, but the driver that comes with the program.

... I fail to grasp your point. In these situations, the "driver" and the "application" are pretty much one-and-the-same. Both written by the manufacturer.

 

If the driver is incompatible, then it makes no difference in the end, as the software then becomes useless on a practical level.

 

The truth of the matter is somewhere in between of course. In some cases, the driver does not work on modern systems. In other cases, it's the software. In other cases still, it's both the software and driver.

 

But having to dig out (or otherwise keep) an old legacy computer just for downloading the PLC programming into the PLC, is really inconvenient to say the least.

 

Heck, at my last job, we had to keep a barely functional Windows 95 laptop around for emergencies, just in case we got called for a service call for a Plant that had PLC components from the late 80's and early 90's, and wouldn't even run on Windows XP.

 

None of this is ideal, but part of the problem is that some of these huge companies had highly specialized software developed 20 years ago at a very high cost, and don't wish to pay for new software or to port the old software to modern systems.

 

I was overtaken with glee when official XP Support finally died. Did that prevent our employer from continuing to run the entire business on XP machines? Nope.

 

Thankfully, my current employer understands the need for keeping to a hardware replacement schedule, and they actually budget this out so we're not surprised.

[ErickS89]

Can't we just let XP die already?.... 

Will Microsoft just say no, update or you're on your own! We're done!  Nope, they love piles of money and they'll get it.

[dalekphalm]

Can't we just let XP die already?.... 

Will Microsoft just say no, update or you're on your own! We're done!  Nope, they love piles of money and they'll get it.

To be fair, the only people Microsoft will extend these XP Support Contracts for, are companies who HAVE an upgrade plan in place to move to Windows 7/8.1/10 within a year or two, and will only continue to support said companies as long as they keep making progress towards migrating off legacy systems.

[ved]

Isn't $9.1 mil how much Bill finds on the parking lot.

[MblaZe7run]

Yeah I have no idea why people always ignore the costs associated with Linux. They see that the OS itself is free, and think "Welp that's that". On a personal level, where you're willing to learn Linux for your own uses, sure no problem.

 

If there's anything I've learned about a corporate environment, it is that NOTHING good comes free, or even cheap.

[TheMidnightNarwhal]

And I really doubt they are saving ANY money by doing that. Because you still need a company to develop linux.

You can get most Linux distros free and Linux has the best security. No developping here...

[REDHOTIRON2004]

I am amazed they are still using windows xp for such a sensitive sector as the military. Windows xp is basically the most easily hackable and unsecured OS out there.

Military with such a huge defence budget should have developed its own OS or atleast considered investing in linux that is world apart from windows and is easily the most stable and secured OS by design itself. So, there is not much that needs to be done on those fronts from the start itself.

[alextulu]

... I fail to grasp your point.

 

My point is that, it's possible that the reason why I've never had problems with legacy programs is because I've never used used legacy programs that come with drivers. That would explain my confusion.

[ZetZet]

You can get most Linux distros free and Linux has the best security. No developping here...

Yeah no. If you want to be truly secure you have to have a team working on your os at all times. Linux is not bullet proof.

[vm'N]

I am amazed they are still using windows xp for such a sensitive sector as the military. Windows xp is basically the most easily hackable and unsecured OS out there.

Military with such a huge defence budget should have developed its own OS or atleast considered investing in linux that is world apart from windows and is easily the most stable and secured OS by design itself. So, there is not much that needs to be done on those fronts from the start itself.

This is not simply about changing. In the process of changing any software or the like, it will have to go through a huge validation test, especially since we are considering military uses, where the validation test are even longer and tougher.

There are multiple ways to almost totally secure any server, if we dont consider things such as physical access to the servers.