DII (F)- what a complete waste of money!!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Lady_H, Jan 24, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Have recently been migrated to the (sold as) all singing all dancing DII (F), at huge expense.
    It's caused a lot of upset, especially amongst the old and bold, largely due to to so-called progress setting everyone back about a decade.

    No shared calenders on Outlook, no floppy disk drive for OJAR's, role-based e-mail addresses (fine if you know your correspondants role...not so fine if you dont), Army forms unobtainable through ARMYNET, vant send the same e-mail to internal AND external addresses... to name but a few issues.

    What were they thinking???

    Any thoughts...
     
  2. Please, no! Tell me you are joking! We are due for DII/F conversion later in the year. It's caused us considerable pain to reach this point and I am not looking forward to selling more pain to the unit!

    The data limits are highly restrictive and the loss of Outlook personal folders has caused a lot of angst!

    Pen and paper seems strangely attractive....

    Litotes
     
  3. Its all because the MOD don't want to have to buy a decent Spyware and Antivirus package which is a bit of a cop out. They believe the system will be virus free if they block it from the outside world - how wrong they are it just reduces the risk. There was a Soldier article recently that said hacker attacks are up drastically and given the work we do all should be sensitive too the danger that brings.

    However communications both internal or external are there just limited to the key Super Users in each unit for external. Every user should have a personal email and if their role requires a role based one and you should be able to find them that way. The MS apps will bring benefits to most and I am sure the shared calendars etc will come in time - its better facility than Unicom.

    Only improvement I would make sooner rather than later is Webmail to access your emails externally not all of us will get PC's or laptops. But that is just me being picky :)

    Cheers
     
  4. Yes, but that isn't saying much. We were disconnecting Unicom terminals in '97 owing to them not justifying desk space. Having experienced JAMIS, MFMIS, TAFMIS and CHOTS in the meantime (each with their own strengths and weaknesses) it is increasingly apparent that DII is not the holy grail, just another name on the list. The pernicious thing about DII is it is linked to JPA and all its attendant 'efficiencies.' DII must work to make JPA work - so the stakes are just a teeny bit higher?
     

  5. Pen and paper is now being utilised here- it's ridiculous!
    Sorry to give you a sense of impending doom, there's very little you can do to prepare for it.
     
  6. ...Every user should have a personal email and if their role requires a role based one and you should be able to find them that way. The MS apps will bring benefits to most and I am sure the shared calendars etc will come in time - its better facility than Unicom...

    18 months time we've been told... its really not good enough.

    In the early days of it being installed, I personally thought there was a lot of fuss about nothing from those who dont like change.

    But there are a lot of issues that have become apparent, that are going to cost everyone time
     
  7. Well we haven't had our passwords yet......
     
  8. I agree 18 months for shared functionality is too long. But it should give those wo need it ready access to MS apps that only a select few have now (ie those who have issued or purchased own PC's - I know thats most of us!). It will not take that long really to recreate your contacts list in Outlook once again if you need them. If you are a Super User or know one then you can contact external parties via them.

    Like I said the biggest issue is e-mail comms. Without external access its next to useless for your average TA unit who only have 2 hours to train once a week plus now everyone ogginbg on the two terminals at unit level to grab their mails. Higher Comd in Units will use this mail instead of external and thus even commanders will be outside the comms loop until they too can get in to see their mails. Would be much more effective for TA and probably most external military postings if you could get a secure Webmail function like that on ARMYNET (better integration here would be better too - like shared resourses rather than publishing everything twice.

    Cheers
     
  9. The shortcomings have been well known for some time , as Lady_H says "
    so-called progress setting everyone back about a decade." seems to be par for the course nowadays as long as the beancounters are happy.
    And as Baz44 says "now everyone ogginbg on the two terminals at unit level to grab their mails. Higher Comd in Units will use this mail instead of external and thus even commanders will be outside the comms loop until they too can get in to see their mails" the solution will no doubt ( tounge in cheek ) be a clerk printing off the emails and sending everyones replies for them ,

    PTP, the generic password hint is " Halt who goes there"........... :omfg:

    WW
     
  10. Thats all well and good, but different areas are affected differently again- I hadn't even considered the TA aspect of it all- bit pants for them then.

    But within my work, i need to frequently (and often with little time to be messing about searching for addresses for people I do e-mail, but not regularly enough to warrant being on a distribution list) send out e-mails to both civ and internal recipients- the way the system works means that now my work is doubled with no increase of time allowed.

    Bit of a whinge I know, but I dont think people realise quite how inconvenient the new setup is.
     
  11. Another failed attempt at the 'Paperless Office'. While I agree that the practices of yesteryear require updating, printing off wadges of paper just to look at it and go 'Yep, thought so...' and then throw it in the bin or holding onto outdated copies of policy documents etc.

    Using group areas for common data or single-point updating is a good idea but will require time to break the old habits, but reducing us to roles is unacceptable (as most of us have more than one), as stated before there has to flexability. Oh well, accept it, embrace it, nurture it.

    PS. Only 100MB per group/personal area migration?? Some of the people I work with use that much for their signature block!



    I AM NOT A NUMBER.......I AM a HUMAN BEING!!!!!!!
     
  12. I thought DII(C) was crap, and still cannot fathom the registry, or the thinking behind moving from straightforward shared network drives to a web-based interface. Simple things that used to take one step now seem to take four instead. Now, on top of that, can someone tell me what the feck is a "role-based e-mail address"?

    Bring back the handwritten memo!
     
  13. Something like "1Blankshires-RHQ-RSM" or "89SR-SUPSQN-LAD-AQMS"
     
  14. Never had a problem with the internal/external maile thing and as I had to contact a lot of civvies and TA subunits over the internet it would've been a nause if it hadn't worked.

    Thouroughly agreed re the lack of outlook personal folders - instead of being able to search for documents by date, recipient or subject they had to be saved in the yy-mm-dd-classification-subject format and thus could only be searched for by date (assuming they had been filed correctly). The excuse used for the change was that personal folders were not Freedom of Information Act compliant.

    What was deeply annoying was Project BLENHEIM which barely functioned on the TA system and the failure of the CoC to admit to this, leading to the imposition of ridiculous timescales to fill the fecking thing in.

    If you think that's all bad just wait until JPA comes to a TAC near you. All TA members to do their own admin on drill nights? When there's only one terminal per TAC & I'd wager that'd be locked in the PSAO's office like QRs...
     

  15. Have you been 'done' yet??? just out of interest

    That was my attitude at first, but after a week, serious flaws have come to light