Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New South Wales Traffic Authority Switches to Macs

pudge posted more than 10 years ago | from the whole-lotta-macs dept.

iMac 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."

cancel ×

350 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wow, I'd hate to live there (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889704)

Imagine the taxes required to pay for all those Macs.

Mac OS 10.4 alpha screenshot! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889706)

WOW! [thekremlin.net]

IF I EVER MEET YOU, I WILL KICK YOUR FUCKING ASS. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889744)

no shit.

Mod Parent Down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889777)

Sick fuck post link

hmmm (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889707)

Another example of Apple talking over the world!

Fags (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889714)

OS X sucks.

Use FreeBSD instead.

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889761)

Is it dying more slowly than OS X, so you'll get more life out of it?

Re:Fags (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889955)

Duh, OS X is built on a FreeBSD kernel.

Mod me informative. kthnx

Good job Apple... (2, Funny)

superangrybrit (600375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889721)

People deserve better. Companies too. ;)

Re:Good job Apple... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889771)

People deserve better. Companies too. ;)

You're right. They do deserve better than these stupid, underpowered, overpriced desk lamps. Especially at the taxpayers' expense.

Providing more vendor options? (2, Insightful)

visionsofmcskill (556169) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889724)

how does going to a mac provide them with more options for purchasing decisions?

thats like saying your moving from california to idaho for a better selection of produce.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889749)

Even the undeniable truth -- that you can only buy Macs from Apple -- is flamebait to the devoted Macintosh hitlerjugend.

apple.slashdot.org -- News that has been censored for your protection.

All the colors! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889796)

There's bondi blue, uh....pink....and some other colors. Green too, I think. All the choices they could ever want. It's the most flexible system around.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (3, Insightful)

Debug This (702664) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889822)

uhhh, a Unix based OS perhaps? Think about it; it can support the majority of open source software, which has an excellent range and low price too.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (2, Insightful)

Halfbaked Plan (769830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889850)

Desktop Solaris provides a Unix based OS and supports the majority of Open Source software. And Sparc desktops aren't really any more expensive than G4 desktops.

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.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (1)

Debug This (702664) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889869)

Lets see you turn a freaking Sparc aqua then, you cynical bastard.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889910)

More software purchasing options, dumb-ass.

Since Macs run just about everything people use Windows for (Office, E-mail, calendars, accounting, etc.), and can run almost all *nix software, they are the #1 platform for variety of software choice. There isn't even room for debate.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889947)

Macs are the #1 platform for software choice, huh?

apple.slashdot.org -- Watch people lying to each other

Re:Providing more vendor options? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889969)

I have a better question....

WHY do this in the first place?

They have [the old] "java" terminals which can do virtually anything they need just by upgrading the Sun servers, which I'm certain will be upgraded anyway.

Sounds like a big waste of money to me. Maybe they want to appear as though they are making giant improvements or even worse, backroom deals ... who knows, but I just can't see why they need to upgrade/update except to get rid of old hardware.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8890002)

So the background behind the story is that these are the same sort of dunderheads who bought 'Java' terminals, or 'Net Computers' or whatever those things were??

hahaha.

Re:Providing more vendor options? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8890007)

Updated from dumb terminals to Macs, eh? Only explanation is kickbacks from Apple.

Huh..... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889727)

Stuff like this might help keep Mac sales from sagging significantly Q/Q [akamai.net] again. iBook's flat. GO APPLE!

When will they adopt honest accounting of stock options? I'm thinking never. Discuss.

Re:Huh..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889913)

Why shouldn't Apple play the same crooked games with stock options as Microsoft? They're both companys with about the same ethical standards.

Re:Huh..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889973)

Microsoft doesn't give out options anymore, only stock.

Apple almost went under in the 90s due to Enron Accounting, don't be shocked if it were to happen again.

Ummm... (0, Insightful)

FrYGuY101 (770432) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889728)

They decide to switch to "open standards-based software and systems", and decide on Apple, a company which makes Microsoft look like a bastion of openness?

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... (4, Insightful)

CoolMoDee (683437) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889774)

they do control the hardware, but all the parts in there are standard peices of hardware. It isn't so much the hardware that they are worried about, it is the software. OS X is pretty damn nice to open-standards and the hardware is nice. They still can go with a linux/bsd solution, such at a time when the latest Mac OS won't run on the machines properly they can load up Linux etc.

Re:Ummm... (2, Insightful)

FrYGuY101 (770432) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889807)

Granted, but it's either stick with OS-X and be restricted to a much smaller subset of hardware they can choose from, or switch to Linux/*BSD and realize that Mac hardware *is* standard, and not exactly cheap.

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:Ummm... (0, Troll)

NoodleSlayer (603762) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889826)

ADB
Nubus
The stupid little mac-monitor connecter, new and old versions of it. ...

I'm sure if you gave me more time I could come up with a really nice long list of Apple proprietary hardware. My all time favorite though was when they altered their standard-compliant SCSI CD-Rom drivers so they would no longer work with non-Apple CD-ROMs.

When it comes to following standards Apple is worse then Microsoft. I've yet to see Microsoft alter their drivers specifically to not work with a competitors hardware.

And then you go to the software argument... You can still run most of the new software coming out on Win98 SE, with few exceptions, you can hardly say that about Mac OS 9. Try saying the same about MacOS. Mac-enthusiasts like to tout the "longevity" of Mac Hardware but that simply isn't true when you can't even run the latest applications on them, and that's not even touching the gaming space.

Re:Ummm... (5, Insightful)

Halfbaked Plan (769830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889877)

That's all old Apple stuff. The new Macs use standard memory, IDE drives, USB keyboards and mice. They've bellied up to the Wintel hardware base, just like Sun has.

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... (0, Offtopic)

FrYGuY101 (770432) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889892)

That'll happen as soon as the rest of Slashdot stops holding the instability of the Win 9x series against Microsoft. (Currently typing this from an Win XP machine with a 91 day, 18 hour, 5 minute, 14 second uptime, give or take a few minutes as I'm double checking what I type).

I've found there are fewer memories longer than that of a geek annoyed...

Re:Ummm... (1)

Halfbaked Plan (769830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889930)

That day won't ever come. The wintrolls on C.O.L.A. will shout at the linuxtrolls on C.O.L.A. back and forth about problems with Red Hat 5.1 and Windows 98 for an eternity.

It keeps them busy and out of trouble. So who's to complain?

Re:Ummm... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8890004)

Nice, that's only a handful of patches behind!

Thanks for being on the Internet, I sure appreciate the extra spam.

Re:Ummm... (1)

FrYGuY101 (770432) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890031)

Nice, that's only a handful of patches behind! Thanks for being on the Internet, I sure appreciate the extra spam.
Well, considering I'm behind a Unix-based NAT router, *and* am running a third-party firewall, with a sprinkle of Antivirus, with a liberal dose of common sense (IE: Don't open attachments from people you don't know), I don't think I'm putting out any spam. But thanks for asking...

NuBus (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889980)

NuBus was created by TI.

And it was used in more than just Macs.

Honestly, when Apple selected NuBus, they had no real choice.

There were two other major busses available at the time.

One was VME Bus (used by Sun, amongst others). This was in wide use, but card support was strange, selecting drivers was often difficult. Also, you had to remove jumpers when you put in a card and put them back if you ever took it out. As an aside, VME Bus was "unfair", giving priority to some cards over others. This was not a big deal, although it was made out to be at the time.

The other was IBM's AT-bus (later ISA). This was incredibly slow and it was tied closely to the architecture of the Intel 80x86. Trying to make it work on a Motorola processor would have been difficult, and even if done perfectly would have produce very slow throughput since AT-Bus was only 16-bits wide. And, as we all know, installing more than one AT-Bus card at one time was incredibly dicey, requiring lots of jumper settings.

In short, Apple chose the only alternative they could have to accomplish their goals.

As to ADB, well, they could have used the PC keyboard connector (PS/2 wasn't available or in wide use at the time). It wasn't well suited to international keyboards (as you couldn't detect what keyboard was attached very well) and Apple wanted international support. It was key to gaining the desktop publishing market, which they did very well.

ADB also allowed the mouse to be plugged into the keyboard (reduced connectors) and allowed the machine to be turned on from the keyboard, which was nice.

All in all, I think your complaints are misguided. The technologies you speak of actually show less protectionism than the issues of the motherboard ROMs at the time.

As to Microsoft not working with competitors' hardware, Microsoft doesn't sell hardware. Well, usually they don't, and when they do it, they do it poorly (witness their current failed attempt to enter the 802.11 market). Anyway, there were 3rd party solutions to make 3rd party CD drives work. I don't get what the big deal is.

Re:NuBus (1)

Halfbaked Plan (769830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890024)

There were only two computer busses in the whole world at that point in history?

Ummmm, sorry. That's really an 'out there' claim.

But you're arguing against a dunderhead. There were good things that came out of the ADB, and good things about NuBus.

Re:Ummm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889996)

when the latest Mac OS won't run on the machines properly they can load up Linux etc.

Why waste money and time risking software upgrades if they are not necessary?

1200 computers is a lot and the upgrades aren't free either. Once installed you lock down everything and only apply security patches.

I also doubt they'll hold onto these machines that long either. Expect another stupid upgrade in about 2 to 3 years time.

NSW RTA isn't exactly thin in the cash department, which is why I suspect they are doing this useless upgrade to a working system in the first place.

Re:Ummm... (1)

Aqua OS X (458522) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890021)

Considering Macs last longer then cockroaches... they probably won't have to switch linux any time soon ;)

Re:Ummm... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889789)

HOW DARE YOU, SIR. How dare you speak ill of Apple at Slashdot. Their closed off system with proprietary OS and proprietary hardware is a refuge for open standards-based software and systems, because it's not Microsoft. Microsoft is the only company you are allowed to bash in here. Certainly not Apple. They are good and wonderful and blameless, and they do EVERYTHING right.

Next time, post GOOD stuff about Apple, and good stuff only. Free karma, too.

Re:Ummm... (3, Funny)

PhyreFox (576728) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889800)

"Microsoft is the only company you are allowed to bash in here."

Forgotten about SCO already?

Re:Ummm... (2)

sinistral (80451) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889812)

Open *standards*. They didn't say open hardware, nor did they say open source.

Re:Ummm... (5, Informative)

OmniVector (569062) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889821)

that would be true if microsoft windows was based on freebsd, but i believe you're mistaken.

lets take a looksie

windows has the registry. apple has xml files
outlook and outlook express use a proprietary database format. apple uses mbox
windows uses a proprietary network file sharing protocol. apple uses nfs
windows has a closed kernel. mac uses a freebsd kernel (of which you can download on apple's website).
microsoft uses it's own proprietary messaging protocol. apple uses oscar (which may not be open, but it's a hell of a lot more used and standard)
microsoft's browser defaults searches to msn. apple's browser defaults to google.
microsoft's browser is based on a non-standards compliant closed source engine. apple's is based off the open source khtml library.
microsoft's compiler and IDE is closed and costs thousands. apple's is free (xcode) and based off an open source compiler (gcc).
microsoft's backing .net and includes a very crappy jvm implementation. apple uses's sun's official jvm with performance improvements and native widget toolkits in os x, and this is installed by default
microsoft uses a closed source web server. apple ships os x with an open source webserver, apache.
microsoft implemented a proprietary api for game development, directx. apple bases their display system (quartz extreme) off opengl, and supports openal now as well.
x86 machines use proprietary bioses for each motherboard. apple uses openfirmware, developed by sun and ibm i believe.

i think i've made my point, but believe me, there's more. that sounds a lot more like open-standards based than microsoft.

Re:Ummm... (2, Insightful)

Halfbaked Plan (769830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889891)

MacOS X isn't based on FreeBSD.

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:Ummm... (3, Informative)

dysprosia (661648) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890018)

No, Mac OS X's kernel isn't Mach, it's XNU. Mac OS X's core operating system is called Darwin, which has a lot (but not all) of it open source.

"NextOS" doesn't exist, but Mac OS X is somewhat derived from OPENSTEP, from NeXT.

Re:Ummm... (1)

be-fan (61476) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890019)

OS X isn't based on FreeBSD. The kernel is a modified Mach 3.x and 4.4BSD-Lite2. FreeBSD provided most of the userland, while Net/OpenBSD provided networking and filesystem components.

Re:Ummm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8890023)

Who was it that said "Great Artists Steal"?

In other news... (1)

CaptainPinko (753849) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889853)

Hardware company has complete control over their hardware. Story and reactions at 11.

I think they meant that MAcs play nicer with Linux and other *nixes and that Macs are a lot friendlier in the OS department then windows... the do have an open source kernel and do ship with open source tools.

Re:Ummm... (2, Informative)

CatGrep (707480) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889855)

Apple, a company which makes Microsoft look like a bastion of openness?

Ummm... Since when did Micro$oft start basing Windoze off of an open source OS (As Apple has by basing OSX on Darwin (which itself is a FreeBSD derivative))? Does Microsoft give away development tools like OS X's Xcode?

Wouldn't a Linux or *BSD solution, ultimately, be what they should have gone with?

You could definately say that OS X is a *BSD solution.

Re:Ummm... (1)

Pranjal (624521) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889872)

Wouldn't a Linux or *BSD solution, ultimately, be what they should have gone with?

Err.. What is Mac OSX based on again? IMHO this is a fantastic decision. It helps them transisition easily as everything is still the same sort of GUI as Windows but much better. And if someone wants to goto command line and customize stuff and have a network class OS which is easily admistered from a central place without the bother of security holes, you have BSD on which MacOS X is based.

We are now seeing the fruits of Apple's decision to move to a BSD platform. As already mentioned sometime back, even the developers and power users and moving to the Apple platform. Apple has the best of both worlds, Excellent GUI, great power user functionality.

Re:Ummm... (1)

burns210 (572621) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889903)

I was agreeing with you all the way... until you started typing.

Apple's niche is built on being able to know what their hardware is, and better write software for it so that the computer, as a whole, is more fluid. How f-ing dare they! Linux can be built on a system where they have complete control of the hardware. Hell the lycoris guy just started a company to do just that. What is wrong with it? You mean it would be bad for Sun to sell an OS on a non-intel chip and write software that is tuned in such a way to take advantage of it? This was a great strategy for them, and it is for Apple too. So what is the problem.

They won't choose freebsd/linux for the same reason i prefer to use my mac. It is easier, in all aspects that i have encountered, to accomplish things on my mac (and thus save time, i/e money) than on my bsd server. It is just more effecient, for me atleast. And the cost of buying my mac, minus all the time and frustration i have gotten to avoid, has made the purchase a bargain.

Re:Ummm... (1)

FrYGuY101 (770432) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889936)

Note that I specifically said that I meant no offense. I, in fact, in some way admire that system, as it does tend to result in a well-functioning system as a whole.

I still stand by the point that Apple hardly qualifies as an 'open standard-based software and system' while they keep their hardware bundles to themselves.

Re:Ummm... (1)

burns210 (572621) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890001)

in that respect, i would concede the point, atleast in part. Yes, apple is mostly closed in their hardware, not entirely(yellowdog linux is the only vendow allowed to sell apple hardware without the macos installed, and i mean only as in only ones in the world) but pretty much. Their hardware itself is open though, i mean sata disks, ibm ppc(open standard) processor, standard ram, pci-x/pci cards... their monitor plugins are weird, but still standard(just not a widespread one, i believe). I mean even their firmware is open(unless i am mistaken, correct me if i am).

The individual parts, to my understanding, are very open(maybe not the most popular, but still an open standard) the way they are packaged together is closed to others. That has its good and bad sides.

In the workplace, is it really gonna be a problem? ram upgrades arn't an issue, and their would be minimal hardware changes, but overall the cubicle upgrades can still be performed.

It isn't completely open, but it does have open aspects, and that shouldn't be ignored.

Re:Ummm... (5, Insightful)

Rockin' Az (315143) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890033)

Kid - computers are not about hardware. They are not about software. They are about data. If switching to Apple helps them ensure their data is cross platform, then they are getting all the openness they need.

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: (-1, Redundant)

TurnerK12 (748592) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889731)

Wow, this is cool. The more Mac's the better, I always say. It's a good alternative to Windows. So is Linux of course.

Re: (2, Informative)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889995)

The plural of "Mac" is "Macs", not "Mac's". "Mac's" means "Mac is", as in "My Mac's such a sweet machine", or "Your Mac's been upgraded AGAIN?"

This isn't just a Mac story... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889733)

It's also a boring aussie story

Who the fuck cares? (0, Troll)

James A. N. Joyce (771122) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889735)

No, seriously, does this matter at all? Does it really make one fucking jot of difference whether some traffic authority's bundle of boxes are running Mac OS, or Windows, or Red Hat Linux, or NetBSD, or whatever? Does it make any difference at all? No, it doesn't mean a thing! I guess it's a pretty fucking slow news day.

Re:Who the fuck cares? (1)

crackshoe (751995) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889769)

Its somewhat important as (i assume. i'm not bothering to read the article becasue a) its slashdot and b) i'm drunk ) they're using it in an enterprise application, which, prior to OS X was difficult and isn't particularly common (in my experience) outside of colleges.

Re:Who the fuck cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889820)

hell yes to alll that.

i may not be a big apple fan, but anything non windows is cool to me, (its not a MS hating thing, its a pro everything else to level the playing field thing).

and since mac is Unix (or is it unix like, well it doesnt matter anyways). im happy about that.

as my favorite quote goes:
"Microsoft windows is designed for the Internet,
the Internet is designed for Unix"

Re:Who the fuck cares? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889819)

They just scored 0.5% of last quarter's sales of iMacs!!!!! That's like really big and stuff!

You know Apple's dying when yet again, a puny sales order for around 1000 machines is OMG! FRONT PAEG NEOWS1!!!1! on Slashdot.

OMG!!!! WE BUYED TEH DELLS AN TEHR AER LIEK TEH HUNNERDS OF TEHM AN IS RELLIE BIG NEWS!!!1! SUBMET TEH TEH SMALSHDOT!!1!

Re:Who the fuck cares? (5, Insightful)

phatsharpie (674132) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889904)

Actually, this is pretty important. Governmental departments are notoriously slow to change. This shows that governments are slowing giving MS/Windows alternatives a chance, which is extremely positive. Sure, they may not have gone with Linux (the fact that Mac OS X runs MS Office natively probably makes it easy for them to transition to the new platform), but this shows that alternative OS's are slowly gaining traction. Furthermore, Australia is very Microsoft-centric. I was surprised by the prevalence of MS technology there. And the fact that an Aussie governmental department would go with Apple highlights that alternative OS's may have a chance after all.

-B

Re:Who the fuck cares? (-1, Flamebait)

djupedal (584558) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889961)

guess it's a pretty fucking slow news day.

Hello....this is /. - where's your mind? Not a 'news' site....

Re:Who the fuck cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8890026)

This is a MASSIVE contract. If you lived in NSW you'd know how much the filthy swine rob from us poor bastards who own our own vehicles.

I don't see the reason for the purchase. That said, I'm glad they bought Apple computers instead of Dell or other i386.

Last thing I need is my details on some hackers hard drive, as my NSW drivers license number stays with me for life, even if I change my name.

This is EXACTLY what Apple needs... (4, Interesting)

Chordonblue (585047) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889741)

It's been a long time since I've heard a story like this that didn't involve a university or some other education-based organization.

I think Apple can make an excellent case given the rising amount of spyware, viruses, and worms on the PC as well as selling their BSD-based OS.

Good deal and hooray for competition! It's about time (again).

Re:This is EXACTLY what Apple needs... (1)

Halfbaked Plan (769830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889830)

It's been a long time since I've heard a story like this that didn't involve a university or some other education-based organization.

I guess a government bureacracy is a tiny step up from that, or something.

Re:This is EXACTLY what Apple needs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889847)

I think Apple can make an excellent case given the rising amount of spyware, viruses, and worms on the PC as well as selling their BSD-based OS.

Gosh, I almost skip over these comments as I have learned to do after hearing them for 6+ years running, but somehow yours caught my attention. I really believe you. I don't think you'd just parrot the same zealous crap that people have been shoveling for the past several years that never came true, something has changed and YOU ARE RIGHT! This is the year of Linux AND the year of Apple!

Re:This is EXACTLY what Apple needs... (1)

Chordonblue (585047) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889942)

I'm FAR from an Apple zealot, believe me. But I say, right tool for the right job. If these folks think they've got the right tool, then I applaud them for not just bending over and paying the MS tax as so many do.

It's a free market, people can and should use what they want. My .org uses MS Windows, but then again, we also use Open/StarOffice.

Re:This is EXACTLY what Apple needs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889993)

Don't worry, Microsoft more than makes up for the lack of the "MS Tax" by charging significnatly more for Mac Office vs the Win version.

iMac & open source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889745)

so how does going to macs go with the open souce thing - mos OSS software works with windows at least as well as OSX.

Sure it has unix goodness from darwin but it has M$ office too.

Re:iMac & open source (2, Informative)

tkanerva (301782) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889941)

> so how does going to macs go with the open souce thing - mos OSS software works with windows at least as well as OSX.

Maybe there's quite a bit of OSS software for Windows, but have you ever tried to compile some yourself? Unless shipped with specific win patches, it won't be easy -- or even possible. Compiling for OSX is, on the other hand, mostly just ./configure and make. Apple even bundles their X11 with the operating system. Therefore: you can have all that unix/linux sw running on your mac just about as easily as you could do that on linux. On windows, things get much more complicated.

Diversity in computing! (5, Interesting)

JohnMajor (772052) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889746)

This is quite a great achievement for Apple. They currently are doing very well with their advertising campaign and showing off the capabilities of their products. I have been a hard-line OSS user for probably about 5 years and have been very impressed with the new eMac, Powerbook and G5, the new MacOS X too is very refined and well done and I love how the command line utilities are still available(compared to Win). I think all governments should be trying to distribute their computing schemes to several different OS for security purposes alone and should at least not be locked into deals with Microsoft. Linux on the desktop I just don't feel has the simple usability of MacOS X yet so I am very glad too see Apple getting such a large deployment. I am sure their will be more to come as I doubt they will hear many complaints about there G4 iMacs.

Re:Diversity in computing! (1)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890000)

You said: "about there G4 iMacs."

You meant: "about their G4 iMacs."

Why not Linux? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889753)

Shouldn't this be: "New South Wales Traffic Authority Switches to Linux"?

Re:Why not Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889858)

Maybe because they want a UI which is consistent and actually *usable*. Macs provide all that, rather than some hacked together user interface geeks use.

Pudge is a Homo (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889755)

Dear Apple,
I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well-earned reputation for being
"the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world
of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I
plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the
homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal
to young boys. Thanks in advance.

With much gayness,

Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

Re:Pudge is a Homo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889833)

That would be a 'troll', not 'flamebait'. Jeeze, they give modpoints to anyone these days, don't they.

WHAT? (-1, Flamebait)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889763)

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.

Um, HELLO!!!! Apple is far less open with regard to their systems than any other major manufacturere of consumer grade computers. Microsoft's OS is less open than Apple's, but their systems are definately NOT "open stardards-based".

I know I'm going to get mod bombed by the Apple Zealots, but I have the karma and this needed to be said.

LK

Re:WHAT? (1)

tliet (167733) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889879)

> but their systems are definately NOT "open stardards-based"

Hmm,

PCI
Open Firmware
S-IDE
USB
IEEE1394 (Firewire)

Come again?

Re:WHAT? (2)

burns210 (572621) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889881)

Yes, because apple does give full documentation, for free, to it's users while also giving free development tools. Apple also doesn't include large ammounts of gpled software in it's client and server base install while also NOT supporting X11 compatability for linux apps. Furthermore, Apple sure as hell doesn't have an open source kernel to which you are free to contributed or fork.

Ya, them damn Mac people. Buy good hardware, get a beautiful GUI ontop of an open kernel using many open tools.

Re:WHAT? (0, Troll)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889954)

Did you even read my post?

I conceded that Apple's OS is much more open than the industry leader, but I am talking about their computers.

Just try to build a compatible system if you doubt me.

LK

Re:WHAT? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889887)

Yes, idiots who don't know what they're talking about always need to be heard.

Re:WHAT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889929)

I know I'm going to get mod bombed by the Apple Zealots, but I have the karma and this needed to be said.


Not by apple zealots, but by people who have a clue what they're talking about, which you don't.

Bah! Up the prices go again... (-1, Flamebait)

therufus (677843) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889764)

Now that the RTA are buying overpriced garbage PC's, the cost of personalised plates will go up again. Not to mention how simple the customer service staff will get. "Look, my computer's aqua!!!"

Just when we're getting ass-reamed for driving a car, it gets worse!

Re:Bah! Up the prices go again... (1, Funny)

TheOneWhoIsMany (665398) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889795)

not to mention to cost of licences! i better go for my green P soon. i can see them going form cositng me a total of $95 to $150 with the implemtaion of this new mac policy

What about the roads? (1, Funny)

ttys00 (235472) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889785)

They could have used the money to fix 1200 potholes in Sydney roads, you can swim in some of them when it rains!

Re:What about the roads? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889871)

Silly Aussie, you expect them to fill pot holes when they can buy trendy computers? Pfft. What do you think their job really is?

Re:What about the roads? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889962)

They could have used the money to fix 1200 potholes in Sydney roads, you can swim in some of them when it rains!

Okay, so they could have fixed up one side road. But what about the rest? :)

If they really wanted value... (2, Interesting)

walter_kovacs (763951) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889791)

... then they should have gone for a custom FreeBSD solution. All the stability of OS X without the heinous cost of proprietary hardware and software. The outlay on custom development for their needs would have been offset with cheaper hardware, no licencing costs, and then they would have completely owned their own software rather than being locked into the vendor relationship.

As Han Solo once said... (4, Insightful)

Chordonblue (585047) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889974)

"Yeah, but who's gonna FLY it, kid?"

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:If they really wanted value... (1)

Tyler Eaves (344284) | more than 10 years ago | (#8890025)

You'd be surprised how quickly programming/sysadmin time can factor out differences in hardware cost.

OS X Sucks (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889792)

Use Windows [microsoft.com] instead!

Mod Parent Up - He does have a point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889870)

For the love of God, just use Windows.

Do Rocket Scientists give medicine to Rockets? (-1, Troll)

Baddsectorr (709324) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889793)

absurdity is what makes this World so enchanting. Its so nice to see that people still think that using computer takes some brains. or for those who can't think, THEY USE WINDOWS!!!

Kudos to the Apple sales dude... (5, Interesting)

Lattitude (123015) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889827)

... the G4s will be used as point-of-sale terminals for its counter staff to handle RTA customers transactions across "prepared business applications" as well as for "collecting data and payments and issuing licences, registration certificates and receipts for various transactions"...

So they are using full blown Macs for a cash register, attaching a laser printer for receipts and certificates and running some specific software. Seems to me a cheaper solution might be found using a dumber device and a web app or two.

Re:Kudos to the Apple sales dude... (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889884)

Your solution doesn't secure a job for the IT person that authorized this purchase with apple in the near future when they resign...

funny. (4, Insightful)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889874)

This isn't just a Mac story: The further adoption of open source is being undertaken

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. :P

Re:funny. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889895)

Mac OS* is dying!!

the 'openness" of Apple (5, Insightful)

bartron (772079) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889876)

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

What value? (4, Insightful)

dafoomie (521507) | more than 10 years ago | (#8889909)

I don't see the value in using 1200 Macintoshes for simple data entry applications which could be accomplished by dumb terminals. Nothing against Apple or the Macintosh, but this is like replacing the Fords and Chevys at the public works with 1200 brand new Mercedes-Benzes.

Cool! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8889963)

Cool!

That means I get to listen to iTunes next time I go to fail my license exam.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?