This is a cost-management and inability to design networks properly issue. Laptops and the like are expensive and we're saddled with legacy IT systems. The move to Flank Speed and Nautilus VDI is a start and there's more coming (I can't talk about it here). NMCI, both it's design and contract, have proved very difficult to fix when they work "well enough" and don't impact operations in a "meaningful way." Believe me, I've heard over and over the complaints about how slow IT is, how limited assets and resources are, and how difficult it is to do tech refreshes. I've even experienced it on both the user and acquisitions side.In all seriousness, I don't entirely understand what limits us compared to civilian companies with respect to computer access ashore. Does it need to be 1:1? Absolutely not. Does it need to be better than it is? Absolutely. I know I am going to get the "oh you helo guys are so silly" eye roll, but seeing front offices bitch about JOs sitting around doing nothing when in reality, they are just waiting for a computer to open up is ridiculous.
I can't help with bureaucracy but I can tell you coming from NAVWAR and working on the Shore IT side, that we are actively trying to fix NMCI but are constantly under budget constraints (both actual amount and cashflow). The continuing resolutions, constant cannibalization for other programs, and DISA requirements placed upon us make things very difficult. There are a lot of good people at PEO Digital trying to solve the problem but our cybersecurity and network design restrictions (NIPR, SIPR, etc) are antiquated and don't allow for modern network design. We are starting to see that with Flank Speed and Nautilus VDI but the transition is very slow.Solid agreement here. NMCI has been hot garbage since it was rolled out. Now that there's a whole different system afloat, IT support is even worse. I don't know if it's gotten better in the past 4 years, but I doubt it. Conceptually, it seems as though the past 15+ years have seen an increase in the number of "efficiencies" and "lean practices" that lean heavily on the member, and take time and energy away from the mission. It's the "death by 1,000 cuts" that some guys talk about. When everything is getting just a tiny bit harder every year, in aggregate, it becomes unsustainable. Meanwhile every individual bureaucrat says "We're not asking that much more, it only takes 5-10 minutes of your time.", which makes the problem difficult to characterize and describe beyond "administrative creep" that can always be blamed on others, certainly not YOUR program, which is IMPORTANT, by God...
Senior Leadership does actually. The fixes at the level of something like NMCI are not fast or easy and we are hampered by being behind the power curve as far as design, talent, and technology are concerned. Fixing NMCI is not much different from a bureaucratic or programmatic standpoint than fixing programs like LCS, JSF, and DDG 1000.The fact the Navy has not unfucked its IT mess over 20 years after the introduction of NMCI speaks volumes to me. I've often thought if senior leadership had to deal with the same issues as their sailors it would be fixed, and fast. But they've got aides and staff along with priority support to help them, so they don't and it is still a mess decades later.
As for the reserves, the fact Kelly Beamsley's site is still being updated and used well over 5 years after he retired is just plain...sad.