Slashdot Mirror


Swiss Court Halts Non-Competitive Contract With Microsoft

Ade writes "Looks like the challenge to the Swiss Administrative Court concerning the government contract given to Microsoft without any public bidding was successful: The court has issued a temporary injunction (note: article in German) against the Federal Office of Buildings and Logistics (BBL), effectively stopping the CHF 14M (£8M; $15M)-contract to deliver licenses and support for software used on government computers for the next three years. According to Swiss Government practices, any contract over CHF 50'000 has to undergo a public call for offers. The BBL cited 'no serious alternatives' as the reason which this contract never did."

25 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. First (shill) post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why don't you just leave Microsoft alone, after everything it's been through!

  2. But they may (sadly) have been right by XanC · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If your requirement is to be able to run Windows software, then there may in fact be "no serious alternatives". Now, clearly they should step back and look at the bigger picture.

    1. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by royallthefourth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If your requirement is to be able to run Windows software, then there may in fact be "no serious alternatives".

      A realistic goal for the agency would have been more like "run whatever software gets the job done". For every job, there's a non-Microsoft product that is at least worth consideration.

      I suspect this is simply a case of non-technical bureaucrats getting in over their heads making purchasing decisions when they should've handed it off to their IT folks (if they even have any).

    2. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by Frequency+Domain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Too many idiots write specifications in terms of products vs protocols.

    3. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by AJWM · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even if the requirement is to run Windows software, there may be alternatives. How will they know if they don't put it up for bid? (E.g, someone might bid a system based on Linux and Wine. That may or may not actually do the job, depending on the specific software and how much work the bidder is willing to put in to tweak things.)

      But yeah, the requirements ought to be based on functionality, not a specific software package.

      --
      -- Alastair
    4. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by MoldySpore · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It is ALWAYS the non-technical bureaucrats making the purchasing decisions, since they have the money. But it is the job of the IT/Computer Techs/Nerds under their command to show them the alternatives and, clearly, state why X is better than Y.

      Sure, sometimes that non-technical bureaucrat will still go with an option that most tech-savvy people wouldn't (such as going open source), more times than not "free" + "works almost the same" is enough to get the higher-ups on board. Although the cost of retraining an entire user-base of employees on how to use Linux effectively is a much bigger step than switching from, say, MS Office to OpenOffice.

      Case and point, I did contract work for a company that had switched completely over to OpenOffice, and saved themselves a CRAP load of $, which is significant in this troubled economy. I'd be surprised if more companies didn't start doing this, especially if the economy stays in the crapper like it has been. But that same company still runs Windows XP/2000 because the cost of retraining people would outweigh the short-term turnaround. Illogical, but in these tough times it is hard to blame moves like that.

      --

      "I hope you know how very lucky you are to know me, because I am so incredibly incredible."

    5. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by Samalie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure, sometimes that non-technical bureaucrat will still go with an option that most tech-savvy people wouldn't (such as going open source), more times than not "free" + "works almost the same" is enough to get the higher-ups on board.

      "Works almost the same" just doesn't cut it in the real world most of the time.

      I work in IT, and I would *LOVE* to deploy Linux/OO/etc as a way to dramatically kill my budget.

      The problem is, my accounting software is propriatary and does not run on Linux - Windows Only (and I've tried WINE, no dice on this one).

      So fine, I'm stuck on Windows, but bring in OO.

      Again, no dice...my same accounting package hooks into Office itself for reporting functions, and will not work without Office.

      And I can't make it work with MySQL, so I'm stuck with SQL Server, which means I'm stuck with Windows Server as my backend. Sure, I could migrate my other server services to Linux, but for all the Microsoft that I'm absolutely stuck with there's absolutely no reason to not just have it all on Windows.

      And I know what the child poster is going to say...ditch the sad propriatary accounting package and find an open license alternative. Well, we're a specalized enough industry that there is no way in hell I can get an open alternative that does more than 25% of what I'm doing today with my propriatary system.

      So I'm stuck with my crappy windows application which keeps me on windows and office for the frontend, and microsoft on the back end of my network.

      So its all fine and good to rally the Linux troops, and try to make inroads into the mainstream, but until they convince "real" vendors with "real" products to support Linux, its all just a fucking pipe dream.

      You do know what will happen in this specific case, don't you? The Swiss will now do an open bidding process, and all the linux/open community will bid on it, and they'll be rejected regardless of the fact that it will be WAY cheaper than the Micorosoft bid, on the sole basis that some application that timmy from accounting requires won't work on Linux, and rather than wait through 3 new sourceforge projects with 11 forks over 3 years, they'll buy Microsoft.

      I hate Microsoft as much as the next geek, I really do...but the Open community has a LONG LONG way to go before they becaome an accepted player at the table for any company/organization that can't afford to spend the time, energy, resources, and dollars to get programmers building them their "open" applications.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    6. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by elashish14 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An awe-inspiring exemplification of the term 'lock-in.'

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    7. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by Samalie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Correct my licensing thoughs if I'm wrong, but doesn't Citrix in this case, since it has to run a true Windows environment, require a Windows license for every connecting PC?

      So in this case, I can deploy Linux to the desktop, and pay the MS Tax at the Citrix level, as well as Citrix licenses, so I can do what I'm already doing with Windows on the desktop.

      I love Citrix, I've used it in the past, but I don't think I'm gaining a damn thing with this one.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    8. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by Samalie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As if I hadn't already asked/pressed for this :)

      You know what? Outside of the pure IT crowd (like us here on /.), nobody gives two shits about Linux yet. I'm one of mabye 10 voices in a group of 20,000 installed locations asking for Linux for this application.

      Do you really believe, in this economic climate, they're going to waste their efforts to port the application for 0.05% of their installed base? Never going to happen.

      And yes, I've exaggerated, I have a couple of Linux boxes floating in my environment for doing some tasks (most notably: Spam Filtering), so I'm not pure Microsoft. And yes, I love Linux. But, bottom line, despite all our wishes, it just ain't ready for alot of businesses yet.

      I hope that changes, and I'm doing what I can to add my voice to the chorus...but to restate again, unless the companies out there that make real solutions that businesses use every day that finally run on Linux, we're never going to ditch Microsoft.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    9. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by digitalunity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Linux on 64 bit is *beyond* Win64. I've been using 64 bit Ubuntu on my home computer for a while and have had relatively few issues. So far, the only issues have been with compiling old unmaintained software.

      Vista 64 Home Premium has been an altogether disappointing experience. I had to wait nearly a year for new Canon drivers and was just told by Texas Instruments my shiny new TI84 is incompatible with Vista 64 as are all other TI graphing calculators.

      Funny I have to use Linux to get past software incompatibility with Windows. I'd considered just taking back the calculator but the closest runner-up in functionality is the Casio ClassPad 330 which is also Vista 64 incompatible.

      --
      You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
    10. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by Sparr0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For what you are paying* for that proprietary accounting package, and all that MS software to support it, you could probably hire a team of programmers to make an open source accounting package meet your needs more precisely than your current package does.

    11. Re:But they may (sadly) have been right by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you will be surprised how many seasoned IT guys will go with Windows other then Linux or Unix (Even if they are quite skilled with those OS's)

      Factor 1: Change may be good, but you are going to take a lot of heat from it. Say you move from MS Office to OpenOffice and they get that 1 document that doesn't load in Open Office correctly, it is your fault, and business will stop until they can get that file. If they have Office 2003 and Get an Office 2007 files that they can't open. Then it is just the fact they are out of date, it is not your fault. And will ask the author to resend it in a different format.

      Factor 2: Hiring staff. Sure there are tons of Linux and Unix guys who are willing to work for a good price, but they also know windows to a good extent, and there are the windows people too. Skills are only part of the picture when hiring. So s;taying on a windows environment when your company grows, means you have a better work force to choose from.

      Factor 3: License Costs are really not a big deal, support costs are. Lets say a 500 person company. Now windows license will come with their PCs, and the cost of going linux preinstalled isn't proportionally smaller yet. Then say $300 for office per seat OK that is $150,000 and lets double that to $300,000 in software licenses for an average lifespan of 3 years. So license fees are an average of $100,000 a year. Going with an unfamiliar (to the general users) option over the period of time will have the following effect. 500 people paid an average of say $15 and hour, and say these people will need a minimum 40 hours of training/practicing time, to get use to the new systems (In real life this isn't unreasonable, even for the easiest to use Linux, as people will get hung up on every little difference) that makes it $300,000 then you need more resources to support all these people with problems, and requests for incompatible software (I NEED MICROSOFT PROJECT!) or whatever. So it really adds up. Yes their may be a cost savings over time. However the higher learning curve combined with turnover will always be a bit painful. Besides License Costs for software are really easy for the accountants to work with. The hidden costs are much more tricky.

      Factor 4: As I eluded in Factor 3. Additional Software, these are specialty software that someone needs that the rest of the company doesn't. Microsoft Project, Adobe Photoshop (GIMP Will not cut it), Crystal Reports, GoToMeeting, or some video conference tool that your biggest client uses. Are you willing to fight for Open Source all day long against your company who pays you. Probably not.

      Now you can win in some areas perhaps moving your web server to Linux (assuming you don't have ASP.NET developers), or even if you do move some of your Servers to Linux. You may be able to push Virtual Machines and Terminal Services. or even SaaS so your primary OS doesn't matter much. You can lax rules so it is OK for other people to install Linux if they want to, however they shouldn't be forced into it as it will give you a lot of headaches.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  3. Probably Saved a lot of money by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Having done work for the State of NY, I am sure this happens else where.
    Fair and Competitive bidding work like this...
    You need a job to be done.
    You call the guys who you want to do it.
    They do some "Free" analysis of the problem.
    They give you the requirements as they would do it.
    They also attach the Resume of the people who they want to do the work.
    They make the bids to match the requirements and fit the resume of the people.
    They take in all the bid.
    Then they find the winning bid (which isn't the cheapest) but is a perfect match to the requirements. (which happens to be the company that did the free analysis)

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Probably Saved a lot of money by macbeth66 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      HEH

      That reminds me of my early days of obtaining desktops, circa 1986. Anything over $500 had to go for bid, so we got bids on the parts. They assembled it for 'free'. That worked for close to two years.

    2. Re:Probably Saved a lot of money by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, that is the correct everyone follows. In this case, they simply forgot to pretend to open the bidding process...

      --

      -- Don't Tase me, bro!

  4. Linux may not be ready for the desktop... by halivar · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...but it's close enough for government work!

    *ducks*
    *runs*

  5. no serious alternatives by Hadlock · · Score: 2

    "no serious alternatives" is purchase order speak for "too lazy to look, what we have works" or "renewing contract the easy way". Many times its easier to continue with the software you have, rather than force a regime change, especially when the Microsoft Software is already factored into the annual budget. It's hard to blame them in this case.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  6. There is possible competition by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2, Insightful
    OK: I have be benefit of not knowing exactly what the tender was for, but it appears to include ''support and maintenance''. Assuming that MS s/ware is provided could not this support be provided by a local Swiss company rather than directly with MS ?

    ''Applications'' is horribly vague.

    Part of the problem with this sort of thing is that the people who write the specifications tend to think in terms of solutions, thus ''Word Processing'' is ''MS Word''. These people need to think in terms of what they are trying to achieve and to draft the specifications in those terms. This will allow different/innovative tenders.

    1. Re:There is possible competition by ausekilis · · Score: 2, Funny

      I meant $15 million :-/, though given the US economy, $15 might not be half bad...

  7. What are the consequences of this? by Ghost+Hedgehog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does anyone knows how the Swiss law handles a wrongly done bidding? In the Netherlands and probably the rest of the EU, when a bidding was done against the law, the company that won the bidding may not enter the new bidding. At my old university they had this situation with the coffee machines, there was only one company that had a machine that produced decent coffee and so they won the contract. However a mistake was made in the bidding (the bidding was nationally, instead of European, contracts worth more then a ceratin amount get a European bidding procedure) and the bidding had to be done again, however the only company that could produce decent coffee was excluded and the university got stuck with terrible coffee machines.

    1. Re:What are the consequences of this? by huckamania · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What a horrible system. Unless the company that originally won the bid was the wrong-doer, why should they be excluded? Sounds like something a lawyer could sue over and a bureaucrat could manipulate to game the system.

  8. Re:Well of course there were no serious alternativ by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thus there is no such thing as a "level 5 dwarf". But there is such thing as a "level one slashdot troll"

    Basic Dungeons and Dragons did have advancement within race for non humans so you could have a level 5 dwarf or elf (but not human). That changed within Advanced Dungeons and Dragons.

  9. It cuts both ways by CustomDesigned · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Our proprietary accounting software was built from the get go on open source OSes (starting with IBM EDX - obscure, but open source - though not in the GPL sense). Originally written for a green screen environment, it was abandoned for prettier Windows bases systems by a few clients. All the companies that left functional for pretty either went under or came back. We now have a pretty web front end, and a growing number of EDI, Web Service, and Java interfaces to integrate with other software - even Windows software integrates via SOAP (when there is source available for a Windows programmer to customize).

    As far as highly functional open source enterprise accounting software goes, have you looked at Adempiere? I have been playing with it, and it is good enough that my long term goal is to migrate our stuff to its framework.

  10. Storm's a Brewing. by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The problem is, my accounting software is propriatary and does not run on Linux - Windows Only (and I've tried WINE, no dice on this one).

    Your problem is bigger than "open source vs. proprietary" I'm afraid.

    It should matter whether the accounting software is proprietary or not, because the data itself ought to be in as flat an plain of a file as possible. Encrypted, perhaps, and even compressed (a la open document), but the actual data should be in a plain format like human-readable ascii, or easily parsed binary, where the file header holds a description of the format in human readable form.

    You're talking about ever-important financial data. Its storage ought to be even more robust than mere solar data or ice-core sample data.

    Open source might give you that, and it might even be the easiest route to that, but if you're stuck with a proprietary format you don't know how to read yourself, how do you know it's not going to screw up (or worse, screw up silently) on the first errant bit-flip?

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!