Recently, a group of NASA employees, obviously fearing for their jobs if not their lives, sent an anonymous fax to NASA Administrator Dan Goldin. Thus, on 6 May 1996, the first round in a battle which has raged for over a year, began in earnest. Let's call this one the Johnson Space Center Mac Attack.
The fax, which followed concerns raised at Congressional hearings where Goldin was once again in the hot seat concerning wasteful spending at NASA, reported many serious issues. Among these, the apparent impropriety of NASA Chief Information Officer Jack Garman's endorsements appearing in Microsoft advertisements, the obvious conflict of interest in having Garman's wife Sue in charge of the NASA Inspector General's Ombudsman office at JSC taking complaints on the implementation of this policy, and numerous related problems.
Here are a few choice excerpts:
"Mr. Jack Garman, CIO of JSC, created and imposed a Microsoft workstation standard on JSC, and the contractors doing business with JSC. Many organizations were predominantly Macintosh. This standard has put a tremendous impact on those involved. We have data collected over the last 7 years which clearly shows the Microsoft standard will cost MORE than what we are currently using today. We have tried to present this to management on several occasions with no success....
"l) Mr. Garman failed to initiate a cost benefit study of imposing any standard (PC or Macintosh) prior to implementing the standard. Mr. Garman has been asked to provide this study to the IG. Since it was never performed, Mr. Garman cannot comply. On the contrary, we have studies performed over the past 7 years which clearly shows a dual environment (PCs and Macs) is less expensive to operate and maintain than a PC environment. We have provided these studies to the IG.
"2) If Mr. Garman had performed an analysis of his own database, it would show the Macintoshes were 5 times less expensive to operate and support. The IG was presented with numerous studies, some based upon Mr. Garman's own database, which clearly shows Mr. Garman's standard will cost more to the taxpayer.
"3) When non-Microsoft vendors wanted to voice their complaints concerning limiting open and fair competition, they were directed to the Ombudsman of JSC (a new position initiated by your office). The Ombudsman for JSC is Sue Garman, Mr. Garman's wife. Recently Mrs. Garman has been promoted to a position of even greater importance within Mr. Abbey's staff, yet this new position still raises the conflict of interest issue. The IG is aware of this and has indicated a change will be required.
"4) Mr. Garman has told the IG the JSC IRM Council approved the standard, yet members of the IRM council are not aware of approving this standard. Through the Freedom of Information Act, we have purchased copies of the minutes of the IRM council. There are no indications of the standard being approved in the minutes of the Council for the past 6 years. [Note: Lying to the Inspector General is grounds for dismissal, and may, depending on the circumstances, result in a perjury charge associated with significant prison time and fines.]
"5) Mr. Garman has told the IG "Anyone can get a Macintosh", which is NOT true. The IG was given numerous examples of how civil service employees have been forced into giving up top of the line PowerPCs with less than l year of service for a PC. It has been said these PowerPCs are now being given away to local schools. They have depended on our workstations for years now. They are productive with their workstations. They should not be forced into using a different workstation just because of a self imposed standard. The IG has been lead to believe this is not the policy here at JSC, but he has been given conflicting information from members of the workforce.
"6) Management here at JSC has bought into Mr. Garman's policy despite the overwhelming evidence of its negative impact. The employees have been put on notice not to question this standard or voice their opinions. Because of this abuse of power, they have resorted to anonymous inquiries. Management has basically caved in to upper management pressure and that pressure is now being put on the working troops.
"7) This standard is not just anti-Macintosh, it is pro-Microsoft. Over 200 Novell servers were replaced with Microsoft NT servers. again, without justification or a study to verify cost savings. Novell has been "thrown out" of JSC.
"At JSC we are now using Microsoft MSMail (but will be replaced with Microsoft Exchange since MSMail failed miserably.) Novell servers have been placed by Microsoft NT. Macintoshes are replaced with Microsoft Windows95, word processors and spreadsheets are Microsoft products. JSC is a "supersite" for Microsoft products and has arrangements with Microsoft. JSC has become a Microsoft site.
"8) Mr. Garman has been quoted in many Microsoft advertisements as well as the Microsoft homepage (www.microsoft.com). This has the appearance of conflict of interest when coupled with the facts in bullet 7 above.
"JSC is faced with dwindling budgets and the employees are expected to work "Faster, Cheaper, Better", yet the CIO, who has self imposed a standard, has made their jobs slower, more expensive, and less reliable and sometimes impossible. We have resorted to the IG, Congress, and the media to resolve and expose this issue. We want to work "Faster, Cheaper, Better" but we need the tools. And we need someone to listen."
The story since May 1996 includes numerous complaints, a few minor policy statement changes, and the continuous eradication of non-Microsoft operating systems and software. At great expense to the taxpayer, all computer files were ordered converted to PC-compatible format on 28 January 1997.
An Inspector General's report concludes, "We concluded that: (1) the policy decision and its implementation was not in conformance with the stated NASA CIO policies, (2) the policy decision was not cost effective and no cost/benefit or life-cycle cost analysis were conducted to support the replacement acquisitions, (3) JSC did not conduct information technology acquisitions with regard to users requirements, and 4) a potential exists for a negative impact on space flight mission and safety."
All to no avail. The purge of 3,500 Macintosh platform systems has continued. The written policy was dropped, but the implementation of this policy has continued.
Garman has taken the typical bureaucratic attitude towards these complaints, and has targetted the complainers. In an electronic mail message dated 24 April 1997, he says, "We are quite sure that the 'taxpayer' who complained to Congressman Lampson's office works for Grumman..." The message goes on to direct subordinates to justify various computer acqusitions after the fact.
It would seem to an objective observer that Garman may be deriving some personal benefit. His comments in various Microsoft advertisements suggest that he has been in direct contact with the marketing staff at Microsoft. Has Garman taken payments or been promised a post-retirement position at Microsoft? We can only wonder, watch, and wait.
As recently as 7 June 1997, a NASA employee complained, "It turns out at JSC there are a lot of Mac powerbooks in government excess. Unfortunately, people who would like to get them out of excess to take on travel have to get a multitude of signatures, including JSC CIO Jack Garman's. I guess it's better just to spend $5,000 for the center standard notebook, huh?"
If the waste in this situation bothers you, contact your Congressional Representative and Senators. Majority Whip Tom DeLay has been briefed on this matter, as have Space Subcommittee Chair Dana Rohrabacher, and as Garman indicates, so has the Congressman from JSC's district, Nick Lampson. If this wasteful misallocation of resources in pursuit of computer technology "purity" with the related implications of kickbacks and payoffs doesn't bother you...wake up!
Once again, NASA is spending a huge amount of money. It isn't enough that they have eradicated the "worm" logo, a mere bit of labelling. Now they've managed to eradicate huge quantities of computer equipment, including Macintosh and Novell systems. While they might spend tens of millions replacing the logo, they are sure to spend hundreds of millions replacing the computers, buying new software, and training staff on unfamiliar systems.
Does this sort of bureaucratic witch hunt against unfavored logos and unapproved computer equipment represent an appropriate expenditure of taxpayer dollars, your dollars? Does it bring any of us closer to flying in space, or seeing more Americans walk on the Moon or even one human being one day walk on Mars? No.
It is further proof that we made a huge mistake in turning over space activities to the government. Bureaucratic ineptitude, corruption, and politically motivated procurement are just a few of the problems thus created. We deserve better. At this rate, you and I will never have a chance to fly in space.
