Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

This talk about off-the-shelf hardware in space makes me wonder, given the clear line of sight, if it would be possible to detect their Wi-Fi access points' beacons from Earth. I'm not a "radio guy" and don't know if this would be impossible, simply on the basis of physics, due to the presumably low radiated power from the APs and the limitations of the size of typical antennas on the ground. (Obviously it's possible with the right equipment. We can communicate with the Voyager probes, but that's not with a "can-tenna" and an off-the-shelf Wi-Fi card...)

Edit: Anybody know how difficult it would be to keep an antenna pointed at them? I have no intuition for how fast their transit would be. I assume, since an orbit is around 90 minutes, pretty damned fast.

Edit 2: Some search-engining and back-of-the-envelope not-very-good-at-trig math says the longest possible transit would be about 5 minutes, moving though about 40 degrees of arc / minute. I'm probably completely talking out my ass, though.

It feels like it would be do-able to keep a directional antenna trained on a target moving at that speed.

Oh ya I remember how some computer pulled a windows update over a satellite connection during a research flight (aircraft). That was super expensive, wow. Now Microsoft servers are banned at the outgoing point since you couldn’t reliably stop it the computer itself and new teams with new computers come in.

The astronaut's quote needs to be a billboard ad.. "I also see I have 2 instances of Outlook, and neither of those are working".

Why on God's green earth is Windows running on the Artemis spaceship?

Bashing on MS products and on ReactJS (apparently used by spacex UIs) is a common pastime here and I'm guilty of it myself.

But here we're talking about actual space rockets flying to space with humans in them.

My expectation would be that something like https://tigerstyle.dev/ would be followed or the NASA rules linked from there https://spinroot.com/gerard/pdf/P10.pdf

We migrated earlier this year and had a similar problem. Outlook (classic) works differently than the OWA version. They keep the classic version so people don't spontaneously throw a chair out a window. It's being phased out slowly.

The poor technicians having to RDP with (what I imagine must be) a horrible latency. Although still might be better than some corporate environments lol

Everyone likes to point and laugh, sure, I'm getting a chuckle as well.

However, on more practical level, what are other options? Outlook, the desktop application works really well with local copies, is pretty low bandwidth and very familiar to end users.

IMAP with Thunderbird is probably only other option that would satisfy the requirements.

EDIT: Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents back and forth.

computer virus

noun

    A program which can covertly transmit itself between computers via networks (especially the Internet) or removable storage such as CDs, USB drives, floppy disks, etc., often causing damage to systems and data.

    A software program capable of reproducing itself and usually capable of causing great harm to files or other programs on the same computer.

Maybe for emails and calendars, wouldn't want them to arrive and miss the appointment.

I don't understand the title.

It doesn't seem like they are trying to figure out why two copies of outlook are installed, they're trying to figure out why neither is giving them access to their email.

Is this actually true? What's next? A BSOD? I would have ever ever in my life bet that Microsoft software could be shipped in a spacecraft carrying human beings. Unbeliveable.

I didn't expect they are running Windows up there. Shouldn't be specialized and curated ... smthing else?

From the comments:

‪Andy Meyers‬ ‪@andymeyers10.bsky.social‬ · 3h I said “launch window”, not “Launch Windows”!

Why in the name of all that's holy would you use a Microsoft product on a mission like this? Just about the only thing you can trust about MS is that their software is buggy.

Is it just me that finds it terrifying that theres any Windows bits on a spaceship?

I want to say something like "oh well, this is certainly a non-critical piece of software". Hopefully it's the convenient dashboard and there are other, more hardened consoles for fallback or something.

But in all seriousness, and without glibness or sarcasm: I cannot comprehend how there is any "unexpected" software running on that spacecraft, regardless of operating system.

EDIT*** For those who like me only watched the video and didn't read the thread: This is on a laptop that is non-critical, it is not a part of the spacecraft. Whew. Now I'm sad that one of the Linux distros didn't try to pitch themselves to the astronauts for a sponsorship... Would have been especially on brand for Pop_OS.

There was a literal meme in spaceforce about this. Have we learnt nothing ?

Microslop will now troll people outside of the Earth, a great achievement for them.

So does this mean they now also have... 2 Copilots... ? Terrible joke.

Did they consider scrapping the humans, and just installing co-pilot? heh .. heh.. /s

We can't even leave the planet without MS enshittifying our equipment. God, I really want out of this timeline

Maybe for emails and calendars, wouldn't want them to arrive and miss the appointment.

Coordinating time-zone issues between remote meeting participants on a single celestial body is complex enough. >smile<

computer virus

noun

    A program which can covertly transmit itself between computers via networks (especially the Internet) or removable storage such as CDs, USB drives, floppy disks, etc., often causing damage to systems and data.

    A software program capable of reproducing itself and usually capable of causing great harm to files or other programs on the same computer.

It feels like it would be do-able to keep a directional antenna trained on a target moving at that speed.

Taking bets that the access point is called "Free Airport WIFI"

https://www.npr.org/2010/10/09/130451369/the-zombie-network-...

Probably not possible. Their Wi-Fi access point is inside the capsule, the capsule is made from metal and probably shielding the signal somewhat. Maybe even quite a lot if it's intended to provide some radiation shielding. Also it's low power as it only needs to work inside the capsule, at the given distances signal attenuation will make it almost impossible to pick up anything.

Ham radio enthusiasts might be able to help you out here.

Hams already talk to the ISS on the 144-148 MHz band (which is close to the FM radio in your car). They have about a 15 minute window to talk to the ISS. They have a 90 minute orbit, too, so I would bet similar window to talk as Artemis II.

The ISS is much closer to the earth than Artemis. Quick google tells me the Artemis is 184 times the distance as the ISS (dang!), bit inside the Van Allen belt. Our atmosphere is transparent to 2.4 Ghz, so there probably won't be too much attenuation. You would need to account for scattering of the signal - maybe use a yagi directional antenna?

In conclusion: I bet you could interfere with their wifi, but might not be able to hear their signal

We can keep our amateur radio antennas pointed at the ISS for their entire pass. This would be harder but feels doable. We have directional wifi antennas on AZ/EL rotators to track drones and extend their range.

The poor technicians having to RDP with (what I imagine must be) a horrible latency. Although still might be better than some corporate environments lol

At the time they were ~57,000km out and I calculated it was at least 380ms RTT to the ground receiver, so bad but not unusable.

They do not have to RDP. Powershell remoting or SSH are way faster way to examine the system.

The poor technicians having to RDP with (what I imagine must be) a horrible latency.

Once or twice a month, I have to RDP (now "Microsoft Windows App!") into a Windows XP machine on the other side of the continent through a jump box and a dialup connection.

Latency is bad, but not as terrible as you might think. The worst part is moving files between localhost and remote.

At its current distance, best case RTT would be about 420ms