Google sues feds over Microsoft-centric bidding requirement

[JMH]

Google has set its sights on the business of the United States government, much to the dismay of the government. The company filed a lawsuit against the Department of the Interior on Friday over its request for proposals and quotes for a system to handle messaging needs. The request stated that the solutions had to use the Microsoft Business Productivity Online Suite, a requirement that Google is saying is "unduly restrictive of competition."


In its Request for Quotes (RFQ), a document asking companies to design a solution and quote the department a price, the DOI restricted the candidates to using the Microsoft suite only. The problem is that such a restriction is akin to putting money directly in Microsoft's pocket, as the contract can't be completed without Microsoft taking part at some point.


According to the lawsuit Google filed, the DOI tried to justify the requirement by saying its suite offered consolidated e-mail and "enhanced security." The 37-page filing details several volleys between Google and the DOI, wherein Google points out that Microsoft products still have downtime issues and makes a case for its own Google Apps as a suitable alternative.


The only sticking point is that, while 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. But those uncertified times are distant in Google's memory, and now it's out for federal blood.

Source -
Google sues feds over Microsoft-centric bidding requirement

 

[ahriman]

I dislike Google more every time they pipe up in the news.

 

[Barman58]

How to make friends and influence people must have been missed off Google's reading list.

You cannot improve your chances of gaining a customer by going full out to intimidate and insult them.

Even if Google a correct the bad feeling created by this type of activity will bias the potential customer against them.

Salesmanship 101 anyone?

 

[Tepid]

Which is why I block everything google that I can and will never own anything HemDRoid related.

Google is evil. No Scruples, and Massive Ethics Issues.
Google is everything so many claim Microsoft to be and then some.

 

[Outlander]

My sentiments exactly. They get more and more intrusive. I just installed the new CCleaner and could not find the option not to install the Google Toolbar. Went ahead figuring Revo would exorcise the thing. Right. It took me an hour plus to pick that critter out of the Registry. I'm afraid to look in there again because it has probably re-written the entries somehow. I think I will see if I can just buy CCleaner w/o the Google crap. Those guys have to make a buck and I would rather pay them than put up with Google and what ever their Toolbars do???

 

[Gornot]

Outlander, there is an option not to install it, it's just not easily visible

I agree with Tepid and will seriously stop using anything Google. I have set up IE9 to have everything I have in Chrome, which just leaves Gmail. I haven't been using it at all for a while now, and all I keep receiving is spam, so I might as well just disable the account and stick with the other 6 mails I have on Hotmail xD

Google sucks!

 

[Bootz]

I almost willing to ditch my HTC EVO and get a contract with AT&T for an Iphone 4 or some Windows based phone. I am seriously considering it and yes just because its a google OS on my phone. I hope Microsoft and the US government fire back on them and make them pay.

In fact, i almost willing to make a bet Google gets in some tax trouble within the next few years. Its just a hunch i have after reading some articals about them trying to use tax loop holes here in the US.

Its sad to see all the trolls on ARS saying "Go Google". ARS and Neowin alike seem to attract quite the bunch

 

[Fayla]

Let me see if I understood this right...

The client-- all of its staff are used to and its systems operate on X product, in this case Microsoft Office. They advertise a project only for a interested company to threaten them, saying "Our software is MUCH better than what you're asking us to work with. Hire us now, rip out your preferred product and re-train all of your staff... or we'll sue you."

People advertising for work to be done should not be faced with such attacks. Either the company should be interested in the project or not at all.

Google's do no evil is just bull, this article reminds me why I don't use their services anymore.

 

[Bugsy]

Google is very powerfull and has many people very high up in the Government that have a stake in it.

Google is very evil.

 

[pparks1]

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

 

[Bugsy]

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

 

[Fayla]

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.

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

 

[Barman58]

Would just like to state for the record that Sevenforums is not a Microsoft forum, but an independent forum dedicated to A Microsoft product , and related hardware and software

 

[Lordbob75]

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

 

[Bootz]

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?

 

[Bugsy]

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

 

[Lordbob75]

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

 

[Fayla]

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.

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

 

[Barman58]

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!

 

[Fayla]

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

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!