Google Apps Beats Office 365 For US Dept. of the Interior Contract 245
angry tapir writes "The U.S. Department of the Interior has picked Google Apps to provide cloud-based email and collaboration applications to about 90,000 staffers, choosing Google's services over Microsoft's Office 365. Google had sued the U.S. agency in 2010, claiming its requirements for the contract tilted the scales unfairly toward Microsoft. Google eventually dropped its lawsuit last September."
Libre Office (Score:5, Interesting)
What is the matter with these people? Anybody can load Libre Office, for free and legally, then use the thing for the rest of their lives without paying a cent. It is good old traditional office software, easily used by anybody familiar with any other office suite. No internet connection is necessary for normal use. There are no glaring security holes. How can these dopey bureaucrats pass up a deal like that?
Re:ooh (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been here about a decade. I've seen lots of spammers come and go. I've come to accept Goatse Guy and the Nigger Troll as part of what it costs to give and get my bit in an Internet forum. And that's OK. I browse at -1 to get both the grit and the gloss.
There are now some folk well paid to get top post, and comment on that post until the comments scroll down ad-infinitum of course. Maybe their managers think they're acheiving something on /., and if they're paying for that play I'm fine with that. Those guys gotta eat. One day we'll miss the "frosty piss" first post.
Before these folks were incompetent, and coudn't even string together a sentence in common Englush. They have evolved. Now they have skills and are getting better at it. But they miss that certain something - that "I don't know what" that moves them from marketing to legit. That's fine for me, because I always look closely at the new thing, but these new folk look to do an end-around flanking maneuver.
DOI's original RFQ was biased towards M$ (Score:5, Interesting)
DOI's original RFQ specified that only Microsoft solutions would be considered
Only after Google sued them (and then dropped the lawsuit) that DOI agreed to drop the "M$ only" clause
Tables turn (Score:5, Interesting)
MS: "We would like to bid on this project" govt: "No you cant, it must be SUN" or "no you must be ???" I can't even remember what the it was called, that is how truly relative it was, not relative then, forgotten about now. oh yeah, POSIX. Anyone even remember it?
So anyhow, despite objections for years MS became the standard anyway for quite a while.
If you can blame it on sleazy marketing then, why can't you blame the present shift on the same thing? The fact is he who does the best/most lobbying wins.
Re:To a bureaucrat (Score:5, Interesting)
15 years ago, I worked for Lockheed Martin. Our customer, the US Navy, told us they didn't like Powerpoint presentations, as their information density is so extremely low. That wasn't a general though, so I guess it doesn't count.
Yes, the low information density of Powerpoint presentations is by design, and is allegedly a good thing. Me, I've always thought they were for stupid people. If you can't read high density information, you shouldn't be promoted to make important decisions.
Why are either of these good ideas? (Score:4, Interesting)
Why would I want government documents stored on a google or Microsoft server?
It's fine if the government owns and controls the server but if it doesn't we have a problem.
MS office or whatever you're using tend to run entirely on the local system or at least within your network. So its pretty much in the control over the organization that purchased it. But google docs runs on google server farms and my understanding is that MS 360 or whatever they're calling it does roughly the same thing.
That's a problem. If this is a micro cloud that will be completely owned and controlled by the US government, it's fine... but I worry that this is all getting routed through a generic google server farm. And that's a recipe for disaster.