Government Standards compliance testing Labs

[Chuck Swiger <cswiger@widomaker.com>]

  Ok, as this gets seriouser and seriouser, here's an outline or framework of
  an "action plan" you can beat up on to get us out of this mess and
  home for Christmas:
  
  Someone once said the opposite of progress is congress. Perhaps
  the only way to tame a 3000lb gorilla is riding a a 2ton elephant.
  The USA has a standards problem. Any country still officially using
  the outdated olde English avoirdupois system of weights and 
  measures just has a problem. Face it.
  
  1) Bite the bullet and grant increased funding, maybe use some of
  the immense DOD budget and let them in on it, to the NIST to
  expand government standards compliance testing labs.
  
  2) Establish open standards of compliance that computer software
  and hardware vendors must meet to qualify for govt. purchases,
  instead of every little dept. flipping thru computer shopper and
  buying from whoever has the slickest ads, a govt. wide 
  interface, interoperability, data exchange and API spec will be
  enforced. If your product passes the testing labs compliance
  test it will be considered for purchase. Companies can compete
  on speed, ease of use, etc., but if you don't meet the spec, you
  don't qualify for govt. use. 
  
  For example, SQL. If your database engine passes the interoperability
  and data interchange  test, fine. It can even have proprietary 'extensions'
  but must at least still pass the compatibility test. However, if another product
  uses those 'extensions', it will fail the tests and be off the list. Private
  industry can risk this 'progress' if they want to take a gamble,
  but if it fades into oblivion don't come crying to us for help.
  
  What this means is the govt. bureaucrats aren't going to have fun
  spending taxpayer cash on whatever is the latest, hotest gewgaw
  some silicon snake oil peddler dangles in front of them - but it
  will ensure the US has functioning computer systems that work 
  together. They won't bite the bait only to find a proprietary hook that
  makes their (our!) public info incompatible with another dept.
  
  This way you can ensure a market for small, innovative companies,
  and the govt. dosn't get involved in micromanaging and dictating
  what icon goes where, what subroutine gets put into what function
  in what library, etc.
  
  A govt run standards testing lab to contain the Billster and ensure competition
  amongst vendors will bring back some of the 'manhatten project' era enthusiasm
  for science and technology for humanity's sake, provide a training ground for
  students to learn by trial and error w/o the distasteful hipocracy of advertising
  and proprietary secrets (they can learn that later), sorta like Marc A.'s experiences
  at the (supercomputer application center). 
  
  Vendors will begin to compete to sport the coveted "NIST Approved" lable, like the
  UL approved lable on dangerous electrical appliances, which consumers will look
  for since it ensures it will actually run, and not be unwitting 'beta testers' of half
  baked software rushed to market. Obtaining this lable will be slow, but regain 
  consumer confidence in computer industry products, and the public can risk the
  'latest and greatest' if they want, at their own risk.  It'll be like the "Yes! Novell"
  and "It's Supposed to Run on NT" labels private industry testing labs issue, but
  w/o the credibility problem (and we all know that private industry labs are biased,
  corrupt, funded by one or another interest and can't be trusted). Hardware vendors
  won't have to pay MS thousands to get on the NT hardware compatibility list, etc.
  
  
  (c)1997
  Chuck
  cswiger@widomaker.com