Also, using Mac to run Windows, IPv6
Requiring Internet Explorer
Regarding Mark Gibbs’ BackSpin column, “Internet Explorer required: Your comments”: If, as Gibbs implies, FEMA and other federal agencies require IE because their back-end service doesn’t understand plain HTML, the solution lies in federal sourcing. All we need is a requirement that to do business with the U.S. government, you must be browser neutral. How long do you think it would take the back-end vendors to figure out a solution?
Bill Barnes
Charlotte, N.C.
As well as serving all the people, including Firefox, Mac, Unix and Linux users, the government should avoid requiring a software product whose continually discovered security flaws are prime targets.
Tom Trottier
President
Abacurial Information Architecture
Ottawa, Canada
There is another aspect to this issue that Mark Gibbs misses in his column. Imagine this scenario: During the Katrina aftermath, a well-meaning Linux/FOSS user group plans on filling a truck with older computer equipment (computers, monitors, UPSs, switches, cabling, wireless antennas, etc.) and pre-loads each of the computers with a version of Linux so that victims can start filling out on-line forms, and exchange e-mails with friends and family.
This team can’t afford this good-will effort if they have to install Windows XP on each of these machines, but yet these machines are useless when the users are told to fill out a form for FEMA or other “Internet Explorer Only” sites.
(They thought about loading the various flavors of Windows 95/98/SE that came with these 6+ year old machine, but the trade-off was stability and reliability when they might have hundreds of people using these each day.)
So what is a well-meaning organization to do?
Daniel Linder
Omaha, Neb.
I concur with Mark Gibbs’ analysis and it already does apply to the DOD of which WAWF functions and DFAS Invoicing are components. The DOD mandated through architectural directives, and DOD Technical Architecture documents that specific standards apply to IT functions. The current IETF HTML and SQL standards for example must be used. Designing a website that uses proprietary functions of a browser is not permitted without approval of deviation to the standard. No such waiver approval exists for IE (any version). Unfortunately, the business processes/functions have just come under review for compliance. To get recognition of the issues and resolution to correct the DOD sites comments should be addressed to the DOD CIO.
The long pole is and has been multifaceted. First by Microsoft’s refusal to make IE compliant with IETF standards even though users have repeatedly requested this functionality. Second, many of the Web design tools are specifically written to use the MS proprietary functions as opposed to the IETF standards. Third, and probably the most difficult it finding contractor software developers that are aware of the mandated standards and capable of productively creating the necessary functionality using the mandated standards.
As far as FEMA is concerned, read the GAO and CBO reports regarding the state of IT within the Dept of Homeland Security. It is a fact that virtually any novice Web designer could develop a IETF compliant page and functionality to meet the needs of FEMA as well as be totally browser neutral. Too bad someone doesn’t do it and submit it to the new director of FEMA.
Don Smith
Durant, Okla.
I believe the situation is more fundamental than the technical issues Mark Gibbs discusses in the column. The bonehead coding that requires IE for access is simply a manifestation (possibly Machiavellian) typical of any bureaucracy, including the maker of IE, and virtually all network administration…anywhere and at any level. Why? Because it is not about enabling communication or access, it is all about control.
Darryl Wally
Raleigh, N.C.
Using Mac to run Windows “Closing the door on Windows”: Tolly didn’t close the door on Windows. He switched to Mac… to run Windows.
Regarding Kevin Tolly’s column,
If I suggested to Tolly when he was running Windows to load all his volatile stuff into a virtual PC partition and run it there, he would have laughed at me and called me crazy. But that is just what he did on the Mac. He spent time and effort to virtualize his environment, including going back to older versions of applications.
So Tolly spent time and effort to run Windows, on a Mac. He could have done that under Linux, or even on a PC. I have a virtual PC setup on my machine that I use to run “volatile” applications. It is far easier to run it on a PC in this way, too.
So Tolly bought an obsolete system (the PowerPC Mac is on the endangered species list) to still run Windows. Perhaps the title of his column should read: “Closing the Door on Windows, but opening a Window in a Mac.”
Jason Short
President
Emerald Technology
Mount Dora, Fla.
Closing the door on Windows? Really? Basically, what I got from Kevin Tolly’s column is that now that he is on a platform that he really thinks he likes, he is spending most of his time figuring out how in the dickens he is going to get that Windows environment tucked back in and running inside his new Apple. He hasn’t walked away from Windows, he has opted for the wizardry of a slow emulation model as his new world, which in the end will be a whole Windows world framed by a Mac GUI. That’s hardly closing the door.
Richard Fink
Owner
Computer Solutions
Mill Valley, Calif.
In his column, Kevin Tolly states that his PowerBook gets only a two-hour battery life. He must be beating it to death constantly or he has his energy settings set to extreme levels. I get five to six hours of battery life on my iBook.
Try lowering the screen brightness a few ticks — that’s the single best action to bring life up. The times I’ve gotten six hours were on minimum brightness and not using the optical drive — but connected to 802.11g the entire time.
Shawn Milochik
Senior programmer analyst
Godiva Chocolatier
Reading, Pa.
IPv6 is needed(“A revised look at IPv6”) is hardly convincing as it is combined with a continued adamancy that virtually no one needs IPv6. Among the many points being overlooked is that the greater addressing capabilities of IPv6 create more opportunities for competition and creative service provisioning. Also, network providers forced by the market to adopt the standard will be less able to inflict degradation on the services and traffic flow of competitive carriers and thus be more susceptible to competitive responses. This is a good thing for innovation and all users, although existing network owners may believe that such a robust and even playing field puts them at a disadvantage. Congress is right to inquire as to why IPv6 adoption is going so slowly and should extend the inquiry to include the network industry.
Johna Till Johnson’s mea culpa on her tenfold error on the bandwidth cost of IPv6
Brian Savin
Greenwich, Conn.
