Google Sues U.S. Department of Interior

[sebastienm]

I like Google Apps and use them for my personal use, but i can't even imagine a large organization using Google Spreadsheet: it's horrible for work and is not up to the task for many.
Let's get real, if the keyword is Productivity, forget about G Spreadsheet. It would not just be bad, it would prevent me from doing my work. And just for this reason, i could not consider Google at this time.

 

[LORD_ORION]

[citation][nom]Scotteq[/nom]ctbarrs - Good point, but you need to consider that every Citizen isn't necessarily a Taxpayer. If you do, then the number you quoted climbs to $124,059. After all, the kids don't pay taxes.Oh - I like this clock better: http/www.usdebtclock.org/[/citation]

Wow, I particularly like the interest per citizen calculation. That is the real eye opener. Remember, the fractional reserve banks were bailed out with your money, they make interest on money the government uses and yet you OWE them 10K per year in interest. Nice system.

Uh... go google "money as debt" and get angry.

 

[wawa sxm]

[citation][nom]jhansonxi[/nom]I've dealt with government requirements from the vendor end. It's very common that insiders will create outlandish requirements specifically to block anyone other than their favorite vendor. This isn't just a federal government problem as I've seen it in state and local specifications also.[/citation]

totally agree with you......also its probably cheaper for them to use a similar system...but trusting microsoft more then a competitor i would not.....

 

[Xatos]

Good, keep Google out. Google's already growing too fast as it is, the last thing we need is to have them involved in the government.

 

[sebastienm]

[Correction: Actually, after reading another article, it is possible that only the platform email+security was considered and not the office apps like word processor, spreadsheets...; if this is really the case, my previous comment above is not be pertinent]

 

[Guest]

...and if they want really secure, they should be using the security-cleared version of Linux. Once in there, M$ won't even stand a chance...

 

[victorintelr]

Google: You didn't consider us fairly for the contract!
DOI: Look Google: we rather prefer to be hacked and the secret docs taken by a hacker than.... appearing in a search engine upfront!

 

[Guest]

Wow - Google in the government? Weren't they recently hacked via Chinese hackers? i.g. the Chinese Government? That's a direct "No you can't handle our services." in any market, so thus the exchange and BB environment is usually preferred.

While not everything can be perfectly safe when it's on record that your services have been breached in the past the Government is expected to not use your service until your record is clear - I would HOPE the Government doesn't use Google Apps honestly, or any cloud method, because there's a lack of security there.

 

[zak_mckraken]

[citation][nom]jhansonxi[/nom]I've dealt with government requirements from the vendor end. It's very common that insiders will create outlandish requirements specifically to block anyone other than their favorite vendor. This isn't just a federal government problem as I've seen it in state and local specifications also.[/citation]
Indeed. Most of the time, the buying decision is done before the request is made. Then, they make the requirements to fit the product they have decided to buy. I'm in Canada, but I'm sure it's the same pattern everywhere.

 

[coldmast]

Google: we want to give you what you want.
DOI: I like Redmond.

 

[hokkdawg]

Gee, it seems that using Crayola colors in your logo and having a reputation of selling data for advertising profit doesn't evoke much confidence that your software is good for government use.

 

[dman3k]

Sorry, but Google Docs or Microsoft Office? I choice the latter.

It's Google's fault for not purchasing Sun, so they could get MySQL and OpenOffice.

 

[orionantares]

[citation][nom]dman3k[/nom]Sorry, but Google Docs or Microsoft Office? I choice the latter.It's Google's fault for not purchasing Sun, so they could get MySQL and OpenOffice.[/citation]

If you're going to try to make that comparison at least make the right one. It would be Google Docs vs Microsoft Office Live or Web apps or whatever they call it.

 

[2real]

The government doesn't want to use beta apps. It's simple.

 

[palladin9479]

Jesus christ people need to do some basic research. Google apps are not certified to work on the SIPRnet period, this disqualified them from nearly all projects. Getting certification to work on a classified network isn't just a piece of fcking paper, it takes years for the process to happen. Vista just recently got certified to be used, most systems are still running XP SP3 because of that.

Google wasn't considered because they didn't meet the basic requirements, and certification to work on a classified system is a basic requirement of dam near every DoD project. As for the people spouting security / hacking concerns ... you have absolutely no idea what your talking about in reference to the SIPRnet / other controlled access networks. Do some research on the origins of the Internet, then the DoD's decision to build the NIPRnet and its secure cousin the SIPRnet.

 

[itchyisvegeta]

Anytime a business or corporation, no matter how big or small, sues and wins against the US government, is always a good thing.

 

[alextheblue]

[citation][nom]hokkdawg[/nom]Gee, it seems that using Crayola colors in your logo and having a reputation of selling data for advertising profit doesn't evoke much confidence that your software is good for government use.[/citation]
This just in, Crayola sues Google for patent(ed colors) infringement!

 

[demonhorde665]

google are such babies. insier outsider crap aside , ask me teh governemtn can choose to review what ever f-ing companues they want to when it comes to buying software for thier use. the governet doesnt have to be fair , to corperations . quite franly i love seeing them giving corperations teh short end of tehs tick myself , becasue altely its seems the goverment ahs relaly giving these a-hoels alot of lee way when dealing with individuals (RIAA, MPAA , the car companeis teh banks ) lately teh goverment has just let these companeis run wild on the citizens of this country. so it feels great to see the govermnt acutlaly give a company a bitch slappin even if the bitch slappin is only inregards to the goverment , (though i'd really love to see the goverment set up and start defending the poeple more again like they used to do )

so google can suck , with thier logic they or any other company should be be allowed to force citizens into buyign there product , becaue only buying so so's product would be unfair to the market. pft ... screw google

 

[eyemaster]

[citation][nom]COLGeek[/nom]Being in the acquisition business for the government, I know a little about how this works. Google simply did not meet the stated requirements for the government's needs. They can cry foul, but this is likely to go nowhere. These sorts of claims happen all of the time and are not really a big deal. Not a matter of MS or Google liking/disliking/bashing, but a matter of meeting requirements as stated in the RFP.[/citation]
I'm also close to those types of transactoins... it's also very possible that Google did not meet the requirements because they were written in favor of an existing product claims. That is what the lawsuit will reveal if it's there.