news.com.com — A recent extended downtime of Homeland Security computers only added to a list of issues the department is having with their network. Also included are system reverted back to Windows 95 after a failed Windows 2000 upgrade and databases only being linked to certain computers, meaning data must be entered repeatedly on different machines.
Dec 15, 2005 View in Crawl 4
_____3Dec 15, 2005
I don't understand how an agency that was created in September 2003 can have "aging systems" running Win 9X.
thejadedmonkeyDec 16, 2005
>It's absolutely ludicrous that Homeland Security would have any >machines running 95. Think about the hardware that was out back in 95 >was around. Pentium 1's??? How do they even find parts for those >turds? They must have some old half-stoned Tolkien junky Tech >repairing failed hardware with a soldering iron and electrical tape.Um...I hate to tell you this, but with the exception of the CPU socket on the motherboard, and the CPU itself, everything else is not only industry standard, but there has only been two transitions from the 3.1 days. ISA>>PCI>>PCI-X. It's still way easy to get PCI cards, most motherboards have PCI, even if they have ISA also, and hard dries/fans are all the same. Ram might be an issue too, but lets think about it for a minute. How often have you burnt out a CPU or killed your RAM in a computer that wasn't overclocked or anything. Computer hardware just doesn't break that easily, especially when computers just sit at desks.
zoomieDec 16, 2005
Why is this a surprise? Government bureaucracy is notoriously inefficient. Pond water moves faster than government.
thatsiebguyDec 16, 2005
Seriously.. how do you FAIL a windows 2000 upgrade? Its only been out for 6 years now...
multifacetedDec 16, 2005
Homeland security computers with important data are not hooked up to the Internet! They would the networked internally, and then have a second grid if they need the Internet. Honestly, I doubt Homeland security does Internet research.
sailorDec 16, 2005
I meant to say I make more where I am at. They don't pay the IT staff (if you can call them that) a decent wage. Therefore they don't get any good people.
zedikerDec 16, 2005
truepatriot:The reason the gov't doesnt use Open Source OSs are because they are Open Source. I.E., anyone can look to see how the OS works and thus can better infiltrate the system. While windows is not known for being secure out of the box, with proper IT protection, it can be more secure than an Open Source OS. There is also the cost/security justification as well. Where it is less expensive to secure and maintain windows than it is to secure and maintain and Open Source OS. BTW this doesnt main Open Source isnt used, it just means that Open Source is not typically used unless it is more effective than the windows alternative.Additionaly, there is no excuse to have computers running windows 95. None.
jrepinDec 17, 2005
About time they upgrade to some descent and secure OS like Linux or BSD.
eligottliebDec 18, 2005
I love it when the government's incompetent.
squirlyblackAug 1, 2008
I can undrestand if you want to save money, not buy all the microsoft licences you would to run a bunch of computers, but settling with Windows 95 when you can get linux for free with erything included ? All you would need is a person that knows how to cnfigure the linux boxes and you're set. <a class="user" href="https://cisco.hosted.jivesoftware.com/index.jspa?ciscoHome=true?utm_source=blog+commenting&utm_medium=media&utm_content=Google&utm_campaign=International">https://cisco.hosted.jivesoftware.com/index.jspa?c ...</a>