Every time Microsoft does an update, they reduce functionality. Basic functions like print, search and file storage get moved into sub-sub-sub menus. The point of this is to make room on the main screen for ads. Screwing up your work flow gives you more time to look at them. This is intentional.
The question is do they have a Copilot?
Why the fuck would you use windows in mission critical spaces.
You wouldn’t and they didn’t.
The article has just failed to inform the readers (the few that got past the headline), that this was on his personal Surface Tablet and not on anything associated with the mission.
If it’s on the ship, it’s associated with the mission. Windows has a very high habit of barfing so over itself, as is evidenced by this article. It’s bonkers to me that they chose to use Windows for anything at all.
Tbh nowadays mail software kinda sucks all around, not just Outlook
I disagree
Alright, you’ve convinced me
Then my job here is done!
The tablets are a convenience, not a requirement and so being commercial off the shelf means it’s cheaper and it works well enough than what purpose-built hardware and software.
If every tablet died, the mission would proceed without pause. Except the astronauts would be checking gauges instead of looking at a system monitor on their tablet and not sending as many e-mails.
There was a slight miscommunication at the fabrication stage. The requirement was to include windows and now they are in a windowless tube with two not functioning outlook accounts. Honest mistake, could happen to anyone
Imagine: You are the first human approaching the moon for a landing since 50+ years. Just a couple of seconds before touchdown the PC starts rebooting because an engineer clicked remind me later on earth and the PC registered that nobody moved the mouse or pressed a key for more than 3 nanoseconds so the user is surely AFK and has definitely nothing important going on so let’s close all open documents and reboot 🤷🏻♂️
To phone home
Vibe coding, baby.
Legit endangering our brave spacefarers.
The article leaves out that this was on Commander Wiseman’s personal tablet, a Microsoft Surface Pro and not any device associated with the mission.
He sought tech support for internet connectivity issues on a PCD (personal computing device), which is a Microsoft Surface Pro.
The ‘Two Microsoft Outlooks’ was a description of the issue he was having. The headline is implying that there are two machines running Outlook that don’t work.
NASA detected that the PCD was actually on a network. It asked the commander for permission to connect to the tablet remotely so it could look into a problem with the Optimus software. “I also see that I have two Microsoft Outlooks and neither one of those are working,” Wiseman responded, per a clip shared by Niki Grayson on Bluesky. “If you wanna remote in and check Optimus and those two Outlooks, that would be awesome.”
The source of the quotes and a better article:
Why is NASA remotely connecting to the tablet if it is a personal device?
'cuz they can’t very well send someone over.
On a more serious note: that’s just the easiest way to go about it? I wouldn’t let my boss remote into my personal machine, but if I were to take it on a mission to the moon that’d be a bit different.
I guess I should have said ‘and not on any device required for the mission’. The PCDs are personal devices for the individual’s business and convenience.
They are for things like e-mailing, looking at mission manuals and accessing the Internet. They’re not involved in the operation of the Integrity. All of the mission-critical systems that operate the ship are purpose-built.
But NASA doesn’t need to re-invent the wheel when it comes to e-mail and PDF reading, so they buy commercial hardware because it’s way cheaper, it works well enough and if it fails it doesn’t compromise the mission.
That makes a lot more sense. When I was reading PCD I was thinking about a private device, even if they don’t have much space and even less time I was thinking that they might bring a few small private things. Like a photo of their family, maybe a book etc.
On the ISS missions the astronauts have a weight allowance that they’re allowed to take. It may be the same case here.
Why do they have any Microslop software?
My question exactly: The computers should be purpose-built, including the operating system.
Why TF aren’t they using something like NASA Linux‽
If they made it open source you bet your ass they’d get shittons of free support from the global community! If they’re running my software I’d be willing to hop on a call with the command center on any day at any hour!
“Yes, I know it’s Christmas but NASA is having some trouble with a systemd script on a space ship that’s currently in space…”
My question exactly: The computers should be purpose-built, including the operating system.
They are, mission critical systems are typically on a Unix/Linux base or completely custom built.
The systems that use Windows are the ones related to office work, like updating the crew’s bank information and distributing pay.
What the article fails to mention is that this is on Commander Wiseman’s personal Surface Pro and not on any mission-related systems.
Product working as designed.
‘you have two outlooks inside you, neither work and it will grow’
Nice April 1st. I mean that’d be almost as ridiculous as running nuclear subs on Windows, right? Long EOL’d versions at that, eh?
rustles papers
Oh.
On the stream you could very easily see his PIN code being put in, hopefully it’s limited to that device!
I think that’s the point of PINs. Otherwise they’d just be very, very shitty MS account passwords.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a19061/britains-doomsday-subs-run-windows-xp/
(Though, of course, that’s alledgedly simplifying a lot to make it more click-bait-y: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-trident-doesnt-run-windows-xp/ )
Of course a submarine’s systems won’t be connected to the internet, but using a Windows base with a “Custom Support Agreement” still gives a private US corporation the power to cripple their subs.
IMO something so critical to defense should be built by British developers, and based on OpenBSD.gives a private US corporation the power to cripple their subs.
You, umm, probably shouldn’t look up who maintains the trident missiles those subs carry…
Are they maintained by a private corporation?
I agree, but then I’m one of those really hardcore libre-software-only nutcases ;-)
EDIT: Though, to be fair, the Trident Missiles they carry are US-made, too, so…
Further to this, there isn’t a ‘launch the nuclear weapons’ application which controls things. Windows is used for the day to day admin - producing the paperwork required in any organisation - but the actual control systems, for the submarine, the weapons the reactor etc are not running off windows.
using a Windows base with a “Custom Support Agreement” still gives a private US corporation the power to cripple their subs.
No, it doesn’t.
How is Microsoft going to affect the software installed on a nuclear submarine?
It only gives Microsoft the power to choose to not add new features, the software wouldn’t be on the sub if it required any kind of outside support… the entire point of a nuclear submarine is to perform a second strike after everyone (including Microsoft) is destroyed in a nuclear apocalypse.
Having software that’s dependent on anything that isn’t on the boat would completely defeat that purpose.
Ha! They used to run Unix.
Or …so I hear.
They use Debian on the ISS
Most defense systems use some flavor of Unix/Linux.
Windows is used by the HR person on board to do office work like sending e-mails and updating spreadsheets.
In fairness I don’t think Microsoft designed them to work in space. Maybe it’s their internet connection?
Telemetry was not designed for such pings, which messes up everything else.
Haha! Space travel, meet rolling releases.
Should have used women with pencils again instead of MicroSlop.
https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/places-of-hidden-figures.htm
This was a personal device, not a mission unit.
I’m guessing it’s one of two things:
It could be two shortcuts to outlook. One might actually be Outlook classic.
Another issue could be a dreaded dual mailbox scenario that occurs when an hybrid on-premises user account gets a mailbox in exchange online before their on-prem account has its attributes created. It’s annoying to deal with and fix.
I’m curious as to what the issue is and how they fix it. I would assume that latency and bandwidth are a big problem and they have WAN acceleration going on, which can cause some apps to bug out.
I actually helped Riberbed identify and fix a bug with Exchange optimization that took 4 years to fix. The tech I worked with for about a year when we identified it called me up 3 years later to tell me himself that they fixed and closed it.
Judging by the two Outlooks installed on my cooperate machine I’m guessing Outlook and Outlook (classic) are the two installed… Though they could have “Outlook for Windows” installed too as I see it offering it to me via the Windows store.
Store Outlook should be the same as Outlook, just with ads if not using a licensed account. I’m not sure how they are handling that, but I know they are trying to kill off all but one of the Outlook versions.
They didn’t pay their subscription fees, obviously. Duh.
I also have one! And it doesn’t work.
