Google sues feds over Microsoft-centric bidding requirement

people like myself just blowing off steam, free speech an all that

I don't. If you go into a shop and start saying that all of their products are bad, you're only going to get yourself kicked out of said shop. Freedom of speech about a product is only found in places not owned by the company who make the aforementioned product.

pparks1 said:

I find it funny/ironic that people could be anti-google....and support their claims on a Microsoft forum.

Lordbob75 said:

Lots of strong sentiments here.

Out of curiousity, (excluding privacy issues!), why is this necessarily a bad thing? Google has a point with saying that this is anti-competitive.

~Lordbob

I dissagree, the government came out and said, this is what we want, these are the requirments. Its the governments choice and if google dont like the requirments made by the government they shouldnt have made an offer.

If you read the artical is says, the government requirments, not microsofts. If the government wants it this way, whos to tell them they cant? Google? Really?

Bootz said:

Lordbob75 said:

Lots of strong sentiments here.

Out of curiousity, (excluding privacy issues!), why is this necessarily a bad thing? Google has a point with saying that this is anti-competitive.

~Lordbob

I dissagree, the government came out and said, this is what we want, these are the requirments. Its the governments choice and if google dont like the requirments made by the government they shouldnt have made an offer.

absolutely

It doesn't meet their requirements, they asked for specific tailored solution--the Microsoft suite, Google offered something completely different.

Switching systems can be very expensive, esp. if the system they're switching to is new and unfamiliar to its staff.

Lordbob75 said:

Bootz said:

Lordbob75 said:

Lots of strong sentiments here.

Out of curiosity, (excluding privacy issues!), why is this necessarily a bad thing? Google has a point with saying that this is anti-competitive.

~Lordbob

I dissagree, the government came out and said, this is what we want, these are the requirments. Its the governments choice and if google dont like the requirments made by the government they shouldnt have made an offer.

If you read the artical is says, the government requirments, not microsofts. If the government wants it this way, whos to tell them they cant? Google? Really?

I know that. My point is if Google's software meets the requirements.

The Gov restricted it to JUST MS software (I assume because that was all that met the requirements at the time). If Google's software meets the requirements now, then what?

~Lordbob

I read that bit too :) I just love a good debate when it comes to Google's latest antics~

Barman58 said:

Everyone seems to miss this paragraph ..

Google appears to have been jockeying for DOI viability since at least June 2009, it did not obtain accreditation from the General Services Administration or Federal Information Security Management Act certification until July 2010. Without them, it couldn't qualify as "interested party" in the contract

Google were not even eligible to quote for this solution!