Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Defence Information Infrastructure (DII)"
- the execution is seriously hampered by the need for the security layers involved, which kill the total nett capacity (one 2Mb video clip got circulated early on and brought it to its knees).
Ah, but we all know the way to Amarillo now so it served some purpose!
I was working on this in the early days, trying to get agreement on master support arrangements mainly, but also on core functionality. Only three real problems with it:
- it's operated by EDS on their usual horrible contractual basis that absolves them from everything
- the core design is unworkable and should never have been passed as fit for purpose
- the execution is seriously hampered by the need for the security layers involved, which kill the total nett capacity (one 2Mb video clip got circulated early on and brought it to its knees).
Apart from that, they can't get good staff (like me, for example ) to sort it out because of the security rules so have to keep recycling the same 'experts' to do it.
Otherwise it's a pile of doggie doos. But am I bovvered?
Sounds like another astounding New Labour "investment" of tax payers money.
It goes much deeper than that, fingers, pies, US government etc etc... The idea is sound but to be fair a project of this magnitude is bound to have several setbacks and I guess the blame has to lie with whoever signed it off as acceptable, they obviously didn't understand what was really required as ATLAS are just giving them what they agreed.
Anyone see the piece on Channel 4 news this evening about this ailing MoD project - looks like another shambolic IT delivery sponsored by General Broon and Captain Darling in conjunction with EDS.
Anyone worked / working on this care to comment ?
Sounds like another astounding New Labour "investment" of tax payers money.
It can't even get e-mail properly. Self aware is a long way off.
I think he was referring to AtW.
I have first hand experience of this and yes people aren't entirely happy as they were promised an improved system but in reality they have reduced functionality as many packages won't work or links to satellite systems have been severed, couple that with civil servants reluctance to change... you get the picture.
Leave a comment: