Delta Employees 'Fought Hard for the iPad' as Microsoft Announces Surface 2 Deal

[alent1234]

Um... what? You're going to have to explain that one fully to me because I'm lost.

the deal was probably done at the C office level

once the grunts start to implement it and work out the hundreds of details a lot of problems will come up as well as arguments who pays for all kinds of unplanned expenses like migrating the software to RT or getting FAA approval

 

[rick3000]

I think a lot of Delta pilots may start lugging their old flight bags around. I cannot imagine anything worse than having to radio the tower for tech support.

 

[Liquorpuki]

FYI, the article states they'll be running Win8.1RT...That runs on the Surface(2)RT device using an ARM Chip, low powered and more importantly a crappy app platform. I did an informal check on the Windows 'store' and I estimate they have about 125 RT/ARM Compatible apps...could be more, as there was no way to filter and just show ARM/RT Compatible apps. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/search#p=1&prd=windows-8&q=ARM&s=Store

I don't like RT but the iPad also uses an ARM chip which is by nature low powered

Far as having a crappier app library, I think it works in their favor. Pilots should be using the device to navigate the plane, not playing Candy Crush

 

[ptb42]

I expect the pilots will NOT use the tablets and this will be bigger backlash for Microsoft.

They really won't have a choice. An airline pilot has a huge amount of documentation that must be carried into the cockpit for every flight. He has to have approach plates for every runway that he may be using during the flight (the planned, the alternate, and everything in between).

The airline supplies those charts to their pilots. And it's not a one time charge -- it's a subscription, as they are updated every 90 days (although not every chart is changed each time).

By going to the iPads for at least the approach plates, they reduce the subscription fees, the time spent updating them, and most of all: the weight. That small reduction in weight, multiplied by the number of flights each day, adds up to a lot of jet fuel.

 

[kdarling]

Windows tablets have been in the cockpit much longer

People tend to forget (or never knew) that long before the iPad, pilots were using Windows tablets for far more strenuous tasks than the simple housekeeping that today's pilot tablets are asked to do.

Flight planning, realtime weather updates, GPS based navigation, terrain avoidance... these are all things we did back at the turn of the century on Windows laptops, tablets and handhelds.

--

In this case, Delta also didn't want to rewrite their Windows based training courses and other documents. That's a big savings right there.

 

[roadbloc]

the deal was probably done at the C office level

once the grunts start to implement it and work out the hundreds of details a lot of problems will come up as well as arguments who pays for all kinds of unplanned expenses like migrating the software to RT or getting FAA approval

And why would this have been any different if the iPad was chosen? It'd be foolish to use tablets that couldn't run relevant software, so I doubt migrating software has been an issue that has been overlooked.

Try to be concise. I'm still not seeing the issue.

 

[rick3000]

Try to be concise. I'm still not seeing the issue.

The issue is that no one on MacRumors and most people don't like the Surface and prefer the iPad, which is easier to use and less likely to be buggy. But the C-level decision makers made a decision based on money and not on what the employees prefer.

 

[Benguitar]

I will NOT fly on Delta if this actually happens.

I expect the pilots will NOT use the tablets and this will be bigger backlash for Microsoft.

Seriously? You are going to set out on a personal strike against an airline because of a piece of technology that they use?

Wow.

First off, you must be incredibly narrow minded to think that iPads are the only device in the world that works.

I owned a Surface Pro (first generation) and I really liked it. It did almost everything I needed it to do, but I replaced it with a MacBook Air.

I also have an iPad mini, but I don't use my MacBook Air or Surface in the same way that I use my iPad.

So if the Surface better fits Delta's needs then good on them.

But keep in mind how Microsoft operates, and what the article said about Delta being "in bed" with Microsoft, no doubt Microsoft basically gave Delta the devices, seeing as that they gave the company I work for waivers for Office for only $10.00 each

Point is, Microsoft sold them on a good deal, and if it works out well for Delta why should it bother us?

It shouldn't. That's just the way business works, Microsoft offered a deal that Apple couldn't or didn't want to match, so it very well have been in both Apple and Delta's best interest for Delta to use Microsoft systems, at least in the time being.

Am I still an iPad supporter? Absolutely. Do I think that Delta could develop a great system that would run flawlessly on iOS? Yep.

I think this also has a great deal to do with Delta being lazy/uninvested in iOS. While it's probably easier for them from an IT standpoint to just install Windows applications on their devices, but only time will tell how well Windows 8 will work in this scenario.

Point is, grow up and stop being a baby when someone else uses something different than you, use the devices that work for you and leave other people/companies out of it, but don't waste your time going on strike against a company that does a perfectly good job at providing their service to customers.

 

[960design]

I manage a little over 2000 iPads in my organization. I've tried to give away surface pros. Two hardcore Windows fans took the offer and traded them back in for iPads 3 and 6 months later.

I currently have a couple of Nexus10s running UbuntuTouch that I cannot keep in my office. So we may have a game changer right around the corner.

We do LOVE windows products. They help pay for my boat.

 

[JustinGN]

IT departments in general don't like or trust Apple. It's pretty irrational.

I remember in a previous job one of the IT guys went mad at me and starting calling me a "hipster" because I wanted to switch my Windows workstation for a Mac. The Mac would actually have been cheaper and had advantages related to the job, but that's the way these guys think.

I'm an IT Professional, specialty in Windows (Active Directory/Exchange primarily). It's not that we dislike or distrust Apple, and it's not about wanting to "keep our jobs". Personally, I use an iPhone and iPad daily (even with Citrix), and I'm scraping up for a Mac Pro to replace my aging gaming rig.

Let that sink in, for a moment: I administrate Windows, yet I use Apple gear.

I also have a coworker who is a flying instructor/private pilot. He's used an iPad for his Jepp charts and flight bag for years, and loves it. He's also our IIS/Sharepoint/Web Services/Security guru.

Both have the bright spots, but let me go off topic and address why IT tends to "dislike" Apple gear. See, the vast majority of organizations administrate their multitude of devices using a system called Active Directory. Apple and Linux have their own version called "Open Directory", but it's not really the same thing, nor does it see the same adoption. Our beef with Apple concerns their incompatibility with Active Directory, and their continued ignorance of the enterprise outside of the iOS sector. I would love to give my users Mac hardware and OS X, because almost universally it's more stable, more reliable, and easier to use. I can't though, because I can't deploy printers through Group Policy, restrict logon hours at the machine level, or even administrate entire OUs remotely without ARD. There's a dozen things or more I can do remotely with Windows that I simply cannot do with Apple, even with a Mac Server as an intermediary.

Frankly? I'd love to see Apple get back into the Enterprise arena once again, either with a competitive solution to Active Directory/Exchange, or by integrating Active Directory directly into OS X without the need for a Schema Extension or Unix roles on the Windows Servers (many of which are being deprecated).

That being said, I am disappointed that Delta went with the Surface over the iPad. It does sound like Microsoft shelled out in the form of discounts to court Delta over to their Surface tablets, rather than listening to the requests of the pilots. I trust the pilot to choose the right tool for their jobs, and for IT to support those tools to ensure the safety of the passengers and timeliness of the flights.

 

[FakeWozniak]

I am taking the article with a grain of salt, like everyone else, but trusting the safety of potentially a few hundred people to a portable electronic device is just scary to me. If they have problems with carrying 50 lbs of charts, then maybe they need to carry only the subset for their hemisphere of operation.

I am assuming this device is not needed for normal flight of the plane. It may be detailed airport maps and charts should multiple failures happen, say with air traffic control, or local communications/radar. Essentially, to be consulted when all else fails.

Pilot behavior is already scrutinized in the news (napping, drinking, etc), but placing a device in the hands of the pilot that can easily change from a reference tool to a game platform is going to add more distraction than help.

I don't care if it is an iPad or a Microsoft product. I don't want my pilot looking away from the controls when not necessary. One messed up update and your device could be rendered useless and you won't know until you need it.

If I were a pilot, I would lug the paper around. I can't imagine the airline requiring the crew to depend on a table and leave the paper behind.

I think this is a trial anyway, like the other one was with the iPad. Am I wrong here?

Thanks,
FW

Worst case scenario..... the Pilot's and Employee's contempt (and reluctance) to embrace the Surface 2 means more mistakes and errors in using the device during flights.

Pilots will use whatever tools their company gives them or else they can look for a new job.
I don't understand your emotional reaction.

They really won't have a choice.
By going to the iPads for at least the approach plates, they reduce the subscription fees, the time spent updating them, and most of all: the weight. That small reduction in weight, multiplied by the number of flights each day, adds up to a lot of jet fuel.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

So did the iPads not work out as well during the beta phase, or did delta really just make a decision on mission-critical technology based on money and cronyism, as the pilot suggested?

I worked at a community college, and it was IBM or it didn't happen. Everything IT had to be IBM. The only allowed deviation was the DEC VAX for the Math department, and even that was originally shoved into a closet and not provided with any power management and limited security.

Yeah, 'big bidness' often shoots themselves in the foot playing stupid games like this.

Heck, the Surface 2 isn't even out yet, is it? Talk about walking out on a thin branch over the Grand Canyon. Probably a good idea now because it's closed...

 

[alent1234]

And why would this have been any different if the iPad was chosen? It'd be foolish to use tablets that couldn't run relevant software, so I doubt migrating software has been an issue that has been overlooked.

Try to be concise. I'm still not seeing the issue.

ipads already have the software in the app store, been there for a long time

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

"they reduce the subscription fees"

Silly human.. When has a company lowered their fees when they change to a digital medium?

I'll bet the fees actually go up because now the pilots can update more frequently...

 

[FakeWozniak]

I can decide to boycott an airline for any reason. You called me extremely narrow minded and a baby for not wanting to trust my safety to a tablet, ANY TABLET. Thanks for judging the person and not the idea. </sarcasm>

Seriously? You are going to set out on a personal strike against an airline because of a piece of technology that they use?

Wow.

First off, you must be incredibly narrow minded to think that iPads are the only device in the world that works.

I owned a Surface Pro (first generation) and I really liked it. It did almost everything I needed it to do, but I replaced it with a MacBook Air.

I also have an iPad mini, but I don't use my MacBook Air or Surface in the same way that I use my iPad.

So if the Surface better fits Delta's needs then good on them.

But keep in mind how Microsoft operates, and what the article said about Delta being "in bed" with Microsoft, no doubt Microsoft basically gave Delta the devices, seeing as that they gave the company I work for waivers for Office for only $10.00 each

Point is, Microsoft sold them on a good deal, and if it works out well for Delta why should it bother us?

It shouldn't. That's just the way business works, Microsoft offered a deal that Apple couldn't or didn't want to match, so it very well have been in both Apple and Delta's best interest for Delta to use Microsoft systems, at least in the time being.

Am I still an iPad supporter? Absolutely. Do I think that Delta could develop a great system that would run flawlessly on iOS? Yep.

I think this also has a great deal to do with Delta being lazy/uninvested in iOS. While it's probably easier for them from an IT standpoint to just install Windows applications on their devices, but only time will tell how well Windows 8 will work in this scenario.

Point is, grow up and stop being a baby when someone else uses something different than you, use the devices that work for you and leave other people/companies out of it, but don't waste your time going on strike against a company that does a perfectly good job at providing their service to customers.

 

[Benguitar]

I can decide to boycott an airline for any reason. You called me extremely narrow minded and a baby for not wanting to trust my safety to a tablet, ANY TABLET. Thanks for judging the person and not the idea. </sarcasm>

Hah. So you actually think the tablets have anything to do with piloting the aircraft?

No.. Airplanes are not piloted with smartphones or tablets.

But tablets probably offer more updated information than pieces of paper.

Get over yourself, your joke isn't funny.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I am taking the article with a grain of salt, like everyone else, but trusting the safety of potentially a few hundred people to a portable electronic device is just scary to me.

Most (all) of today's new jets have a 'glass cockpit'. Everything is a small LCD screen. Some instruments are still analog, but eventually they are going the way of the dinosaur. A series of power failures can take the whole cockpit down.

That did happen in at least one case. I believe the 'Gimli Glider' was one of the worst incidents, and TACA flight 110 also. You really have to read about it to get a glimpse of how easy flying can turn into a really bad idea...

 

[alent1234]

airplanes have this thing called an autopilot that flies the plane so pilots don't have to keep steering it like a car for hours at a time

I am taking the article with a grain of salt, like everyone else, but trusting the safety of potentially a few hundred people to a portable electronic device is just scary to me. If they have problems with carrying 50 lbs of charts, then maybe they need to carry only the subset for their hemisphere of operation.

I am assuming this device is not needed for normal flight of the plane. It may be detailed airport maps and charts should multiple failures happen, say with air traffic control, or local communications/radar. Essentially, to be consulted when all else fails.

Pilot behavior is already scrutinized in the news (napping, drinking, etc), but placing a device in the hands of the pilot that can easily change from a reference tool to a game platform is going to add more distraction than help.

I don't care if it is an iPad or a Microsoft product. I don't want my pilot looking away from the controls when not necessary. One messed up update and your device could be rendered useless and you won't know until you need it.

If I were a pilot, I would lug the paper around. I can't imagine the airline requiring the crew to depend on a table and leave the paper behind.

I think this is a trial anyway, like the other one was with the iPad. Am I wrong here?

Thanks,
FW

 

[Serelus]

The Surface is the tablet of choice for many Microsoft Certified IT specialists...

It keeps them busy.

Many large companies where the IT department will be "consulted" regarding tablets and smartphones will probably choose the Surface, because of it feels "safe" of them: just another Windows-based device for them to manage.

You're assuming something that by the nature of this article sounds preposterous. Any evidence that these IT departments would recommend a surface over an iPad? You and I both know that iPad's are better. So why would an IT department of a large company not know this? Because I myself would never recommend a surface to any of my colleague's

 

[Pompiliu]

Blue Screen of Death: the screen turns blue and you and your passengers die.

 

[FakeWozniak]

I think some folks thought I was arguing Apple vs Microsoft, but I am arguing electronic vs paper.

When you really need that chart/procedure but the IT department remotely updated the tablet at the last airport causing the information to be inaccessible, exactly who is responsible for the crash landing?

I'm sure the electronic controls and instruments approved by the FAA for flight have a higher level of quality than the Redmond/Cupertino systest guys do on the tablets, just sayin...

 

[ReallyBigFeet]

Most likely, MS Surface devices were deemed easier to maintain/secure/share between users than were iPads, something that is well known in most enterprises.

Once you add in the cost of an MDM solution like MobileIron or Airwatch, the cost of deploying iOS devices triples.

 

[ufwa]

Do people here honestly believe there is no backup?

Surface, iPad, any other tablet of your choice. I highly doubt they have no basic backup in case something happens.

No electronic device is fail proof.

If the what the tablets are help replace/reduce load are absolute mission critical, I would hope to god they have a backup.

 

[FakeWozniak]

airplanes have this thing called an autopilot that flies the plane so pilots don't have to keep steering it like a car for hours at a time

Obviously the pilot doesn't need the tablet to fly. Come on guy. Shall I assume that you think something equally absurd!?!

Not totally serious here, but image that the pilot is bored with 2 hours to kill, so he/she pulls out the table and fires up a fun game of Infinity Blade III. In the heat of a battle, a red light blinks and an audible buzzer sounds. But they are too into the game to notice quickly.

If the FAA approved it, then I guess it's okay, but I still have my concern.

 

[kdarling]

I am taking the article with a grain of salt, like everyone else, but trusting the safety of potentially a few hundred people to a portable electronic device is just scary to me.

That's why there are two tablets, along with a set of paper charts stored for emergencies.

I am assuming this device is not needed for normal flight of the plane.

Depends on what it's used for. The first installations of iPads were basically as electronic versions of corporate procedure manuals, etc.

Next step up is using them for flight checklists, which are important, but can be put away during landing.

After that, you get into approval to use them during landings and takeoffs as well, to show...

It may be detailed airport maps and charts should multiple failures happen, say with air traffic control, or local communications/radar. Essentially, to be consulted when all else fails.

A pilot always needs/wants detailed approach charts and airport diagrams, even if using an auto-pilot for some of it.

Approach charts show what comms / nav aids to use, and when to turn and descend. It shows the airport, hold procedures, step-down fixes, minimum requirements, etc.

On paper, they're a huge pain to manually update pages (updates come every 28 days), plus they're rather small in size. A tablet display can be much larger.

Pilot behavior is already scrutinized in the news (napping, drinking, etc), but placing a device in the hands of the pilot that can easily change from a reference tool to a game platform is going to add more distraction than help.

Too late Remember those airline pilots who overflew their destination by 150 miles because they were supposedly busy arguing over company emails on a laptop?

I don't care if it is an iPad or a Microsoft product. I don't want my pilot looking away from the controls when not necessary. One messed up update and your device could be rendered useless and you won't know until you need it.

Procedures for that will be part of training. Airlines don't just get to hand out tablets. It takes a year of testing, creation of manuals and training, and so forth.

If I were a pilot, I would lug the paper around. I can't imagine the airline requiring the crew to depend on a table and leave the paper behind.

Don't worry, pilots feel the same way. There's a backup paper set in each aircraft.

I think this is a trial anyway, like the other one was with the iPad. Am I wrong here?

No, they're not trials. But not to worry. Pilots have been using computers for this kind of thing since the mid 1990s.

The whole point is to lessen pilot work load, not add to it.