Thread: DII(F) - Better or worse than the system you had?

Inc 2 is the 2nd phase of the rollout.

Release 2 is a major software update to the system and has already been delayed more than once.

With regards to disk space, every user gets 100mb of personal and 100 mb of role storage. This allowance has been allocated on central servers wether it is used or not. There are probabaly 1000's of people not using anywhere near there storage levels but since it has been allocated the space is not available to be used by other users.

Last i heard was that there was a couple of hundred TB in allocated and unused hard drive space in uk.

Originally Posted by Space_Cowby

Inc 2 is the 2nd phase of the rollout.

Release 2 is a major software update to the system and has already been delayed more than once.

With regards to disk space, every user gets 100mb of personal and 100 mb of role storage. This allowance has been allocated on central servers wether it is used or not. There are probabaly 1000's of people not using anywhere near there storage levels but since it has been allocated the space is not available to be used by other users.

Last i heard was that there was a couple of hundred TB in allocated and unused hard drive space in uk.

Err yes we know all that. Inc/release 2 has been rolled out to the majority of BFG sites...and the system is still crap.

The remaining sites have been put on hold due to 'lack of' dick space...Due to poor capacity planning...NOT 'Users must donate unused disk space to others!' ... And think about it for a moment...disk space utilised by 'New' users may initially be small; however, as time goes on they tend to save more data, Hence 100Mb allocated space; same goes for mail boxes.

What ATLAS should have done is multiply the amount of users by 100Mb then add at least 10% to arrive at the total space required---it's called 'planning'.

Originally Posted by PoisonDwarf

We wouldn't get a civvy contractor to come in an operate our radios, so why should they control the IT?

Its not the same is it? I've worked on two defence projects, one lead by MOD and the other by a civvie firm who part of the ATLAS consortium. The quality of the deliverable between the two projects was immense with the ATLAS member winning hands down.

I suspect you mean - installation of terminals, building infrastructure/cabling, local account management, maintenance of local servers etc. The corps doesn't really have the staff to go much higher unless the regular Army follows the PQO route in place within the TA - i.e. accepting IT professionals (& graduates) as officers. I'm not putting down supervisors - these groups are probably equivalent, give or take a few gaps in knowledge/experience. The corps is too focused on supporting the combat arms which may mean supporting arms get a poorer service if RSigs IS people start taking over.

Originally Posted by polar

I suspect you mean - installation of terminals, building infrastructure/cabling, local account management, maintenance of local servers etc. The corps doesn't really have the staff to go much higher unless the regular Army follows the PQO route in place within the TA - i.e. accepting IT professionals (& graduates) as officers. I'm not putting down supervisors - these groups are probably equivalent, give or take a few gaps in knowledge/experience. The corps is too focused on supporting the combat arms which may mean supporting arms get a poorer service if RSigs IS people start taking over.

I disagree. If anything we suffer from a lack of quantity, not a lack of quality. Under the new regime (the "CS Engr" plan), Blandford will be producing less than 200 Class 1 R SIGNALS CS Engrs every year. Take away natural wastage, factor in the diverse range of job roles for Class 1s and it will take many years before we have sufficient IT wizards to be able to take on something of any significant scale. Again, in my humble opinion, it is not quality that is the issue.

Regarding the "higher level" i.e. system designers, network architect etc etc, at supervisory level they are churning out less than a dozen per year, but the Corps probably loses more than that in natural wastage, plus there are a finite number of PIDs (and a smaller number than you might think) out there, so again it's a very difficult battle to win and it's simply a matter of treading water for the time being.

Didn't have anything before DII(F). Technically I don't have DII(F) either, since it almost impossible to get onto a terminal with my own logon (doesn't matter how many times you email anything to me FofS, I ain't got a terminal), thanks to the fact that we have two terminals and they're both in constant use by Tp Staffy and OC.

Did it ever used to take 20 minutes for your terminal to start up, 10 for your log on to process and another 5 for your outlook to open on the old system?

Completely agree with you on that, the main server in BFG holds 160gb of data, my iPod is bigger.............

PD - Ref Natural Wastage, is this higher than other trades? My (TA) unit has lost a number of soldiers to DII jobs

Originally Posted by The_Big_Floater

Completely agree with you on that, the main server in BFG holds 160gb of data, my iPod is bigger.............

Not DII specific but this is always something Staff cant get their heads around. They can never understand that you can purchase a TB of external storage for about 100 quid, but a similar amount of network storage costs thousands and thousands of pounds.

If you enabled disk usage on your iPod, plugged it into the storage servers, created a network share and then invited it to handle thousands of simultanous data requests the thing would melt. Extrenal storage/IPODS are an unfair comparison to the DII network storage.

Originally Posted by boney_m

Not DII specific but this is always something Staff cant get their heads around. They can never understand that you can purchase a TB of external storage for about 100 quid, but a similar amount of network storage costs thousands and thousands of pounds.

6 Tb HP SAN are around £7k a pop.

Hi, ARRSE. First post on here...

I work for ATLAS on the SPoC *dodges bullet* and I empathise with those of you who are on DII/F. We're not allowed to slate it at work and all calls are recorded, so please excuse our lack of apology and empathy (and sympathy!) when you ring us up annoyed that you can't do your job as F's fked up your computer!

Remember that WE TOO are on F and we hate it just as much as you!

All I can say is, that the final phase of DII/F will be worth the wait. It will be streamlined, efficient, user-friendly and maybe even worth the money its cost to design and implement. It will be 'future proof' and everything will work! Understand that DII/F is a work-in-progress and requires user-input to perfect. Nobody can design an operating system to be perfect in one draft (windows vista anyone?) and if you, the end-user report all faults (yes ALL, i know - we're gonna be here a while), then this can speed up the process of improving DII/F for all of us.

A 'Major Site' went online very recently, so expect major improvements in F pretty soon...

Anyway, I don't want to defend it too much but, have faith guys, and if in doubt, call the SPoC... :D

Hang on if troops cannot access DII, to get on JPA, the gubment saves money on claims, a deliberate cost cutting measure or a sly way of recuperating losses on installing the system?

Originally Posted by boney_m

IPODS are an unfair comparison to the DII network storage.

Not only that I am also sure they are not the MOD accepted place for the storage of MOD material.

Not only that I am also sure they are not the MOD accepted place for the storage of MOD material.

Quite correct that would be public transport or wine bars.

wrong thread

Originally Posted by trustygeordie

All I can say is, that the final phase of DII/F will be worth the wait. It will be streamlined, efficient, user-friendly and maybe even worth the money its cost to design and implement. It will be 'future proof' and everything will work!

And I am the Pope.

MSR