Subscribe to the Free Print Edition!
Celebrating 25 Years

GCN Home > 02/23/04 issue

Online extra: Readers respond to NMCI

In your opinion, what can be done to improve the rollout of NMCI?

Too expensive.

Better planning before trying to take on a job of this scope. Reduce the number of subcontractors working on the project.

Stop and fix all of the current issues, upgrade the applications, the baseline is too old.

Change contractors.

NMCI needs more empathy for end user needs. There are many productivity losses by constraining applications and IT support. And, there are still many security issues behind this private network.

Collect true performance data and require actual performance as originally touted. The vast majority of users did not need a new email and document system they needed technical tools.

Cancel NMCI.

Communicate with the end users and care about their work. The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard building I am [at] has been condemned and everyone will be moving to a new building in a couple of weeks and then the demolition begins. NMCI people were running network cables and they didn't stop work when I let them know about our building. They said they didn't care, they were just collecting a pay check. I finally found someone in their organization that cared and the worked stopped.

The horse is already out of the barn thus it is too late to close the door.

There doesn't seem to much of a learning process going on. They seem to have to reinvent the wheel. Incomplete user data slows the building of PCs. Incomplete infrastructure also slows down the deployment of PCs.

Put more effort into solving the numerous problems. Currently all effort has been put into installing seats in order to meet a quota.

Allow R&D folks who require cutting-edge systems too continue purchasing their own systems as required by the projects.

At some point I believe they [the Navy and EDS] are going to have to sit down and rethink what they are trying to achieve. The goal of a secure networked environment spanning the Navy and Marines is good. The implementation has been lousy. Many features of the system add nothing to the security or networking goals and seem to be chosen as the least investment path for EDS versus the best way of accomplishing the Navy's goals.

More news on related topics: Defense IT, Management, Web Strategies