Slashdot Log In
Portugal's Vortalgate — No Microsoft, No Bidding
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Mar 03, 2009 03:04 PM
from the bad-for-bidders-and-for-bidness dept.
from the bad-for-bidders-and-for-bidness dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Companies using software other than Microsoft's are unable to bid at many Portuguese public tenders. This is due to the use of Silverlight 2.0 technology by the company, Vortal, contracted to build the e-procurement portal. This situation has triggered a complaint to the European Commission by the Portuguese Open Source Business Association; the case is unofficially known in Portugal as 'Vortalgate.'"
Related Stories
Submission: Vortalgate Portugal: no Microsoft, no bidding by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Macs, moonlight. (Score:3, Insightful)
What about Macs, and Moonlight. Granted Using Silverlight is a stupid move done by STUPID Developers, and braindead PHB. But still if you wanted to do bidding you had ways.
Re:Macs, moonlight. (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Macs, moonlight. (Score:5, Insightful)
And by the time we get Moonlight 2.0, Silverlight will be 3.0. You'd almost think they were doing it on purpose...
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
History, which repeats itself, repetitively shows that Microsoft never does something when they are not going to gain extra profit and/or extra lockin.
So yes, they are doing it on purpose. First they let everybody think "ah it's ok. It's cross platform and also available on Linux. Let's develop for it people!". And then when everybody does it KABOOM! No more support for the competition.
Re:Macs, moonlight. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, suppose you're selling GNU/Linux desktops. Now to make your bidding for a public tender in Portugal you need to NOT USE your own dogfood?
You need to buy from your competitors in order to compete against them?
Seriously folks, this is a REAL issue (plus, this mess was paid with my taxes, I'll have to demand a refund).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Really? Don't you think that Adobe or Apple might have something to say about it?
And so would any competitor.
But to the businesses actually doing the bidding, the relevent parties, I would wager none have any issues.
Well of course the ones doing the bidding don't have any issue with it, it's the ones that can't do the bidding that don't like it. The relevant parties are not just those doing the bidding, it's also anyone who might want to bid in the future.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? Because it's safe to assume everyone uses Windows and Microsoft technologies?
Wrong answer. That would be like the U.S. government assuming everyone drove Fords.
It's 2009 (Score:5, Insightful)
Silverlight comes along offering nothing new but plenty of obstacles and lock-out of end user browsers, requiring active download of a plug-in, and yet, there are bozos out there willing to commit paying customers and their websites to an endless, costly, non-standard nightmare in exchange for nothing! You can't make shit like that up, it's real.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And that silverlight was more or less flash but is easy to program for.
Re:It's 2009 (Score:4, Insightful)
I know nothing of web programing
And yet, you still decided that your opinions on this subject are worth sharing with the world. I love slashdot.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It's 2009 (Score:5, Informative)
Moonlight even works on Firefox on Linux, and it's getting better at a pretty good rate.
Moonlight doesn't support Silverlight 2.0-targeted code. You're being a bit disingenious implying that Silverlight code works on Firefox. Some of it does, but a great deal of it does not. Much of it even requires a Windows client.
That is what we call 'vendor lock-in'.
Parent
Re:It's 2009 (Score:5, Insightful)
...and yet, there are bozos out there willing to commit paying customers and their websites to an endless, costly, non-standard nightmare in exchange for nothing! You can't make shit like that up, it's real.
QFE. You've just summed up all problems in the IT industry in one sentence.
Parent
Flash has wonderful Linux support, I suppose (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose Flash is much better supported on Linux. Hmmm. Yes there are flash versions, but Adobe took their sweet time about it, did they not?
I'm not a FAN of silverlight (or flash!), but Silverlight seems to be better supported on Linux and Mac than Flash was initially. I could be wrong about that.
I don't undrestand why Microsoft gets blamed for producing a product that isn't supported on platforms that Windows isn't supported on. I may as well complain that it took forEVER for Amarok to get Windows support, and it's STILL not available! Or, even better, that Safari took forEVER to be ported to Windows! Or whatever other software you care to complain about.
If developers choose to use a MS only product, that's not MS's fault. Ms is under no obligation to produce software that works with everyone's, including their competitors, operating system. That makes no sense, monopoly or no monopoly. Now, if they were forcing the developers to use Silverlight, or forcing Adobe not to let Flash have a Windows version, that's different.
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, because no one here is biased...
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Insightful)
> This is due to the use of Silverlight 2.0 technology by the company,
> Vortal, contracted to build the e-procurement portal.
I'm sure the bid said, "accessible via any computer with a web browser"? Or "apps available under x, y, and z OS's", or some such?
Quite frankly, although Microsoft getting people dependent on their proprietary APIs is a common business model, this isn't really Microsoft's fault, but Vortal's. Or the doof who put together the RFQ for this particular service for not being more specific about what kinds of computers can access it.
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:4, Insightful)
Quite frankly, although Microsoft getting people dependent on their proprietary APIs is a common business model, this isn't really Microsoft's fault, but Vortal's.
Well, sort of. Remember that ongoing prosecution of MS in the EU courts for antitrust abuse? Remember what it is about? MS intentionally broke interoperability with Web standards and prevented Web standards from advancing and being more functional on the majority of user's systems by leveraging their Windows monopoly to artificially promote IE. As a result, it is harder for companies like Vortal to implement a procurement system using Web standards, resulting in more companies using Silverlight (and Flash). But since Silverlight is another Microsoft product... well hopefully you see where this is going.
You can argue Vortal should not have used Silverlight for this project and I'd agree with you. That doesn't mean MS bears no guilt for making developing this with interoperable Web standards artificially difficult for Vortal.
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:4, Interesting)
Point is: MS is dominant. MS is proprietary. In other words that means that Microsoft uses it's dominant position to release some stuff that nobody is allowed to know how it works, and so competition is doomed. That means anti-trust. That means that the EU needs to start kicking some serious ass along the lines of "Microsoft, open up the specs, release without a license, stick to your specs, otherwise you are no longer allowed to release new software on the EU. No fines. No multi-billion dollar payments. Just do it or lose the right to sell anything untill you comply.
It. Must. Be. Like. That. And. No. Other. Way.
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Insightful)
Why use any proprietary system which reaches 70% of the people when you can use Standards and reach 100% of the people? I fault the idiots who can't recognize the trap this is.
The other possibility is the people who spec this system are too young to recall how bad it was under the heyday of the Microsoft Dictatorship. Development stalled, bugs went unpatched, exploits soared, functionality went down, costs went up, better technologies died etc. Now, the younger generation doesn't believe you when you refer to Microsoft as the Evil Overlord. It's just another vendor now.
I guess we have come a long way.
Parent
Re: (Score:3)
I wouldn't worry a whole lot. There's room for so much improvement in their offerings that (are you listening, semi-rich person who's wondering where to put their money?) you could invest in improving GRASS, repackage it with a sharp UI, and make a fucking mint. Basically, GIS is too big for one company to contain. It's going to blow up in probably three or four years, just judging by the rapid clue-getting by people who do actual work.
It's such a shame that people don't see what a huge impact GIS will h
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Insightful)
Silverlight is a wonderful programming platform, easier and more elegant than flash will ever be
That's nice and everything, but anyone using Flash OR Silverlight as a required part of a tendering process needs to be put down for the good of humanity. What could possibly have been going on in their tiny little minds? Responding to this insanity by babbling about Silverlight being better than Flash is absurd.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I do internal development, on a controlled environment, and I have been pushing for moving to Silverlight for the last 3 months or so.
Our users are demanding more 'Web 2.0' styled interfaces, but we're currently supporting IE 5.5, 6, 7, FF 3, and a handful of Opera users.
The incredible mish-mash of CSS/HTML/Javascript/ASP.Net/AJAX/JQuery can do it sure. But it is a royal pain in the ass. The design paradigm looks like something out of a Dr Sues book.
By switching to Silverlight we gain all of the UI features
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
My experience with Moonlight on Debian Lenny under Iceweasel:
I play a game called Conquer Club (online Risk). There are greasemonkey scripts for getting data and one of them uses Silverlight to draw graphs. I figured I'd try it. I get linked to the MS site, which routes me to the Moonlight home. I click the install and the plugin is dropped into my browser. Easy enough. I go back to the page that required Silverlight... doesn't detect it. I click on the Silverlight "get it now" picture and my browser
Re:Kdawson (Score:4, Insightful)
You seem to forget Microsoft attitude towards software patents and Linux. Microsoft is allowing a (mostly unfunctional) implementation of Silverlight in order to get the perception of it being cross platform, but at some point, and by murphy's law it will be the worst time for your deployment, they will pull the patents card from their sleve.
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Insightful)
And sliverlight runs under what broswers? It will run under IE 5.5 right? Why not just demand all your users get Firefox 3/Opera/Safari 4 and write cutting edge CSS3 pages with XML and SVG for all those cool effects. The only browser that's broken is IE. Yet every body jumps to the "microsoft only" solution as the savior to the problem??? Why???
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Had you ever actually done any work with XML and SVG you'd know that the browser support they have is no comparison to Flash, and I presume Silverlight (I refuse to look at it so I know no specifics about it).
The company I work for uses a Flash based system to get some things done, Adobe has killed part of what that system used for generating dynamic Flash content, I.E. Macromedia Generator. The OSS/Free clone isn't capable of what we want to do, and rather than fixing it up and proping up a retarded and
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do you think all this CSS/Javascript/HTML/Ajax/whatever doesn't work in allo those browsers, it's because of what Microsoft did.
This is probably the worst reason to go with Microsoft-technology, because you know you will just create an evironment where it easier for them to create the same bad situation all over again.
Don't push Silverlight, push Firefox or something. Use open standards. Maybe use Firefox Prism.
Just so you know, there are MSI-packages of Firefox for Windows as well if you need them.
Hell
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Insightful)
...and when Microsoft has wrapped your entire world into a compendium of proprietary digital glop with no hope of improvement, only then will you realize how bad it can be.
...again.
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not about the quality of Silverlight, if you didn't get it go read again.
People with other Operating Systems other than those provided by Microsoft are not able to access a governmental website, that is what is being discussed.
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, if it doesn't, you have the source so fix it yourself.
And the specs to see what needs to be complied to? Oh wait...
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft nearly did kill Office for the Mac, but was a required part of a dispute settlement. Now, it's too profitable to kill off. That's called a dilemma.
MSOffice for the Mac is profitable, but not so much that MS could not kill it if they thought it strategic. The reason they don't is because it would not be a good move for them. Nearly everyone knows MS has a monopoly on desktop OS's, but they also have monopoly influence on the office suite software market. They've spent huge amounts of money in settlements making sure no court case ever gets to the point where that is an official ruling, but it is true nonetheless. It is one of their largest lock-ins to
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Insightful)
Mono will always be behind and you can count on MacOSX support being dropped quite soon. Using Silverlight now is no different than what using activeX meant in the past.
Parent
Re: (Score:3)
LOL, MS discontinued IE for Mac, so they're going to discontinue Silverlight. Yup, that's bulletproof.
It certainly isn't bulletproof, but it is MS's tried and true business strategy. Embrace, extend, extinguish. Once they have sufficient market share for a technology and the competition is hosed, they tend to make those technologies exclusive to their platform. It's not just IE.
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Insightful)
And even better, if you don't work for Novell, and use it via Mono, you might even get sued! Yay for patent-encumbered software that relies on the goodwill of a multiple-conviction monopolist.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Kdawson (Score:5, Funny)
I agree Silverlight is probably better than Flash, but that's setting a rather low bar.
Parent
Re:Kdawson (Score:4, Insightful)
If the company were Chinese would that make you happier?
You shouldn't have to pay to use a government website. Especially not someone in a different country.
Am I asking too much?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Really, that saying was a saying? The old saying was "Nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM."
MS replaced IBM in the saying in the 90s, in what I am certain was a campaign by MS sales agents.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you really had one you would be using Lynx or HyperLink. So STFU and GTFO.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have a commodore_64 for which has been working just fine for me for many many years, but I am told that I must have a "web browser" in order to post comments to the Slashdot web site.
Don't worry dude, I've got you covered! [armory.com]
And forcing people to use Silverlight is nothing like that. There's no good reason to use Silverlight (or Flash for that matter) on a site that easily be done without nonstandard plugins. Remember when they used to do that 10+ years ago? Every site had its own pet video, audio, or oth
Re:Vortalgate? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:I, for one, (Score:5, Funny)
Sadly, we have yet to understand the full repercussions of Suffixgate, but I suspect they will be with us for a long, long time.
Parent
As a representative of Vortal.pt ... (Score:5, Funny)
... I must object to these allegations in the strongest terms. Our QA department went above and beyond the call of duty to ensure compatibility, by testing our software not only on HP and Dell computers, but also Lenovo, Sony, and Acer. Whatever objections these critics have are clearly spurious.
Parent
Re:I am shocked, shocked I tell you (Score:5, Informative)
Speaking as a portuguese, I can tell you that the whole "-gate" postfixing is senseless.. It just doesn't carry weight around here as it does over there. I'd wager the submitter knew this, but just added it anyway because a) he/she is "close" to the matter (probably belongs to the group who's denouncing the situation) and therefore takes this issue seriously and b) wanted to exarcerbate the impact of this news piece by way of a commonly used word-gimmick.. After all, your own media abuses the term whenever some sort of scandal crops up.
As far as "-gate" scandals go, there's another one a LOT more prone to getting that tag (allegations of impropriety or downright corruption that may implicate the current Prime-Minister regarding the licensing of a big real estate development when he was Minister for the Environment -- and therefore had specific oversight on these matters), a huge mess. And even THAT didn't get tagged "Freeport-gate". It would mean nothing to the majority of people here, many would probably not even get the historical reference (even with "Frost vs Nixon").
To be honest, and again speaking as a portuguese citizen, this is the first I'm hearing about it (and the first time I've heard about this particular portal, to be frank). As far as I can tell, this relates to a governmental portal for job procurement/hiring.. The "bidding" here either relates to companies wishing to offer services, applying for consulting positions (getting contracts) or for people trying to get employed.
It's obviously a Bad Thing(TM) but I doubt it was done intentionally and even less that MS had anything to do with it. Not that MS is above this, of course, and they do enjoy a cosy relationship with Portugal and portuguese institutions (we're a small country and they're a BIIIIG corporation -- it's "good business" to keep a major player/investor like that happy, however it may sicken me that we need it) but as other posters have pointed out, this is Vortal's own doing.
Silverlight is a new technology and Microsoft has been investing heavily around here.. I personally know many aspiring developers (as well as fully-fledged software engineers) who genuinely think Microsoft is God's gift to software engineering.. And it doesn't help that MS does indeed get some things right now and then. :)
The way I see it, whomever made the decision to use SL (and the ensuing IE-optimized html code -- even the places you can go without Silverlight installed really suck with Firefox, the usability/interoperability is seriously broken) didn't think things through, or honestly felt that Silverlight is the Next Big Thing(TM), and that going with it would be a clever move.
It's another reflection of the worst thing that Microsoft has managed to instill into so many people, often through the deals they broker with education institutions: the mono-culture mentality.. That only Windows matters (in fact, for nearly all non-CS students, Windows is pretty much IT, and even Apple has only recently begun to show up on their mental map). That as long as you develop for THEIR platform and use their technologies, you'll reach that huge percentage of users, the magic Windows OS desktop-share.. And that the rest basically don't matter. It's so sad seeing this happen in the very places that used to be all about inclusion, early adoption of ALL technologies and diversity.
The submitter over-dramatized the impact that this is having over here, but I'm glad that the complaint went through and hope they can coax the European Courts to issue a legally binding EU-wide mandate on interoperability.
Parent
Re:Open Source vs. Closed Source (Score:5, Insightful)
No, the HUNDREDS of other people in this discussion pointing out that Moonlight is trailing Silverlight feature-wise and that Silverlight 2.0 code CAN NOT run on Moonlight currently, have not forgotten Moonlight.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are we all forgetting about Moonlight?
Okay, other people clued you in about this.
...while retaining no licensing snafus.
That's a really hard assertion to prove.
Basically, you're all letting your fanboy rage over Microsoft blind your sense to the point that you're pushing a fully proprietary non-oss solution (flash) over a fully open source solution.
Who's promoting Flash? This could be done in Java or javascript even using all open Web standards. Failing that, Flash is not being promoted by a criminal organization whose trust gives them direct, financial incentive to break compatibility with other versions. Finally, Adobe pushing the proprietary Flash upon the industry is not illegal since they aren't abusing a monopoly in another market to do it.
As far as I can tell, it doesn't matter how much better the development is made by tools, docs, and language, or how open source the project is... all that matters is Microsoft affiliation.
Not at all. I'm just as
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Who supports HTML 5? It's not even a complete standard. So it's hardly specified much less implemented.
There is an implementable draft and it is partly implemented by basically all the browsers except IE. The point being, we're talking about pushing new technologies (which Silverlight 2 is) to solve the problem. Not that new technologies are needed, mind you, that was just for the sake of illustrating the point.
Are you honestly suggesting a non-existent solution vs. an existent and supported one?
I'm not suggesting anyone implement anything in any particular technology. I'm mentioning that MS's actions in promoting Silverlight are probably illegal and this is evidence of damages.
RTFA. The Portugal Free Software Wingbat club is challenging it to a governing body.
You RTFA. From