News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by bobro on Thursday January 12, 2023 @03:41PM (#34359967)
$400M for 6900 units is about $58K per unit. Good god.
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by ronsor on Thursday January 12, 2023 @03:52PM (#34360075)
It's military grade!
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by akomtu on Thursday January 12, 2023 @03:55PM (#34360119)
25% of that would probably go to fund the reelection campaign of the right congressmen.
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by warinukraine on Thursday January 12, 2023 @06:16PM (#34361632)
You're wildly overestimating how much it costs to buy a congressman.
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by jdsully on Thursday January 12, 2023 @04:31PM (#34360521)
They appear to be combat headsets with unique functions like night vision - not the ones you'd buy for gaming.
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by orange_fritter on Thursday January 12, 2023 @04:36PM (#34360582)
Instead Congress is sending a few million to figure out how to "improve" the headset. I wonder how the improvements will affect the price.
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by c4ptnjack on Thursday January 12, 2023 @04:46PM (#34360707)
~$60k for a specialized tool makes sense

However it's clear we are years and years of development away from this actually being relevant over conventional tools. It really seems like were just giving money to Microsoft for developing what will ultimately just be internal patents going towards consumer or business facing products in the nearer term.

Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by tinglymintyfrsh on Thursday January 12, 2023 @04:59PM (#34360837)
Geeze, why don't they go for MagicLeap 2 Enterprise edition ($?) or Meta Quest Pro ($1500)?

Also, I think the sticker shock is there but it depends on the value it brings.

If it's well-justified to bring a major advantage, then it's acceptable. Otherwise it looks like MIC wasting $$$ on toys when there's unmet social and health needs that are desperately underfunded.

Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by dv_dt on Thursday January 12, 2023 @07:06PM (#34362151)
They will require buying $116k/unit headsets from LockMartRayBoMageddon which will then be subcontracted to Microsoft
Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by waste_monk on Thursday January 12, 2023 @10:07PM (#34363510)
As I understand these IVAS headsets bear very little relation to the commercial hololens devices. I'm not saying Microsoft aren't doing this for a healthy profit, but there's a significant amount of engineering work for relatively small production numbers, and most of it would not be transferable to the consumer and business segment hololens gear. At least initially probably blocked for sale to other friendly militaries as well.

Even simple things like repackaging and ruggedising COTS hardware to pass shock/vibration standards, weatherproofing it for a range of adverse conditions, etc. is a reasonable cause to add "military grade" markup.

Re:Congress says the Army can’t spend $400M buying Microsoft... by abudabi123 on Thursday January 12, 2023 @10:57PM (#34363771)
Years ago on yt the Boston Dynamics robodog was demoed at a targetted $20k a unit. In place of one set of Hololens you send two robodogs on a oneway trip to the Army's field.