Free Software Wins Court Battle in Quebec

courteaudotbiz writes "In a court battle in the province of Quebec, Canada, initiated more than two years ago, free software activists Savoir Faire Linux (translated 'Linux know-how') won the right to submit offers (Google translation; original French version) when the government takes public requests for submissions to replace its desktop operating systems and office suites. This opens the possibility in the future of replacing Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office in favor of Linux and OpenOffice.org, or any other operating system and office productivity suite. In his judgment, the magistrate said that the government acted illegally when it discarded the proposal of Savoir Faire Linux for replacing Windows XP with a Linux distribution."

Comments

Bravo to FACIL, Cyrille and his team!

[MagicFab]

No doubt the court decision documents will help many people understand what Free software is and how it can be considered for government use.

Full (French) PDF of the court decision is available here:
http://blogs.savoirfairelinux.net/cyrilleberaud/KMBT35020100602152155.pdf

English background information:
http://www.fabianrodriguez.com/blog/2008/03/17/gnulinux-integrator-complains-to-supreme-court-about-quebec-government-illegaly-upgrading-to-vista-without-proper-rfps/

Re:Bravo to FACIL, Cyrille and his team!

[tomhudson]

It's always like that , and that's one reason why this decision is important - it means, at least in Quebec, that there's no more of this "it's just an upgrade" BS.

From what I read in the original french, the judge wasn't buying any of the gov't arguments. To paraphrase, if buying new computers with Vista on them is just an "upgrade", then everything becomes "just an upgrade" and there's no reason for ever calling for public tenders. (Those new police cars are "just an upgrade - no need for tenders").

The problem is that Windows boxes are a continuing cash cow because of their higher on-going support needs, so of course people are going to push Windows. They aren't tech-savvy, they just know how to push the boxes, maintain the anti-virus subscriptions, which icons to click to set up the network, and how to reformat.

Re:Bravo to FACIL, Cyrille and his team!

[CastrTroy]

The difference between getting a new compute with Vista on it VS. getting a new computer with Redhat on it, is that for the most part, all the old software will continue to run, and you won't have to retrain all your old staff. If you need to upgrade all the computers in the department, you can't choose Linux, because it will mean rewiting a bunch of internal VBA / IE6 ActiveX apps, and getting a whole bunch of new software and training on that software even for all the COTS software you use, if it exists at all.

Re:Bravo to FACIL, Cyrille and his team!

[tomhudson]

So if you're in the Montreal region, send me an email. freebsd and linux aren't that hard to manage remotely.

Re:Bravo to FACIL, Cyrille and his team!

[tomhudson]

RTFA. These computers were plain-jane desktops running Office '97. Openoffice is completely able to read and write office97 documents.

Re:Bravo to FACIL, Cyrille and his team!

[CastrTroy]

Unless it's office '97 with a bunch of applications written in VBA.

The Frenchs saw it comming

[McGiraf]

Vive le Quebec libre!
- Charles deGaule

Re:The Frenchs saw it comming

[Pojut]

::French Accent:: "Eh Vive Jay Shermaaaan...eh Vive Quebec-eh." -Jay Sherman

Re:The Frenchs saw it comming

[Etyenne]

Libre == Free (as in speech). That couldn't be more fitting!

"Won the right to submit offers"

[Errol backfiring]

Seriously, doesn't this yell corruption into everybody's ears? What right is held back next?

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[OzPeter]

Seriously, doesn't this yell corruption into everybody's ears? What right is held back next?

Nope. What it more likely yells at me is a bad translation from French political/legal speech to English.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Etyenne]

The RFP specified "Windows Vista license", which by definition excluded anybody who wanted to submit a proposal desktop OS replacement plan based on Linux. What Savoir-Faire Linux won is, basically (paraphrased, read the judgement) the right to submit a proposal to upgrade Windows desktop to Linux.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Interoperable]

Quebec has a long history of failing to put contracts to tender properly. In particular, the construction industry has long been involved in the corruption of government officials to win contracts on dubious grounds. It's part of the reason that the infrastructure is so bad. I doubt that corruption was involved in this case however; I think it comes more from the fact that a large slice of the public doesn't realize that non-Microsoft operating systems exist.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Etyenne]

No, wrong. This judgement is about the procument process.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[tomhudson]

Read the article in the original french. The judge made it quite clear that what the government did was illegal. Not just "illegal", but totally illegal, and that they tried to cover it up after-the-fact.

And F/LOSS is political. Using F/LOSS is as much a political statement as it is an economic statement - that it's our computers, our data, and we have a right to see the source, to use open formats, to modify it the way we want, and no private corporation should be able to lock us out.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Rogerborg]

Sure, the RFP should have said "Windows Vista, or better".

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[value_added]

I think it comes more from the fact that a large slice of the public doesn't realize that non-Microsoft operating systems exist.

Now that they have a chance to learn just that.

It's entirely possible that the rate of Linux adoption will be faster than elsewhere; not having to grapple with distinctions involving beer metaphors should make things easier. ;-)

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[tomhudson]

This judgment was about the procurement process in this context, but it has far-reaching implications. It means that the government has to follow the rules that they laid down for public tenders, and not (1) try to subvert the process, and (2) lie about it afterwords. If you read one of the other articles on the french web page, you'll see that it's the Parti Quebecois that is trying to get the government to be more user-friendly with our data and our tax dollars, while Jean Charest' Liberals don't want to know shit

Then again, Jean Charest is such a lying fuck it's incredible. I remember talking to reporters and saying "people actually believe this guy?" and the response back was uniform "he says one thing to one group, another thing to another, but our editors just want to report what he's saying, not that he's lying half the time". We saw it with the whole demerger thing. Make a promise to do the right thing, then lie lie lie while you fuck everyone over.

Then again, what do you want from a former Mulroney Conservative. There are so many anglos in Montreal who vote PQ now in provincial elections because there's no way that they can trust him again.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[courteaudotbiz]

Canadian Federal or Provincial Governments are CYA [wikipedia.org] activists.

Not activists. Extremists.

Why they're afraid to make decisions? Because they don't like to be disturbed while they're sleeping in their office, by their boss saying "Can you explain that to me dumbass? What is this Lunix thing?"

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Etyenne]

Agreed on all count, except on anglos voting for the PQ. I cannot believe I will ever see that in my lifetime!

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Tridus]

More like they don't want to be shot out of a catapult when the media turns something minor into a huge scandal and the politicians come looking for scapegoats.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[tomhudson]

Wrong. The government is required by law to consider all functional equivalents. The government's own studies show that linux is as good as, and often better, than Windows.

By specifying Windows Vista, MS-Office, and Visio, rather than "products that provide the following functionality ...", they broke the law. Then they tried to cover it up, Worse, they claimed it was a "software upgrade" when it in fact included the purchase of new computers as well.

To quote from the judgment Savoir-Faire Linux included this request when they became aware of the intended purchase: Page 8: "L'article 12.4 impose une 'recherche serieuse et documentee', pourriez-vous nous faire parvenir cette documentation?"

Translated, it means "Article 12.4 requires that an in-depth, documented study be done, can you send a copy of the study to me?" There was no study done before deciding what to buy, and the government tried to cover up that they didn't follow the law.

The government, under threat of legal action, agreed to meet with Beraud, but refused to give the specifications, nor the study that was requied to be done (because neither existed).

Beraud then offered [56] an outside expert to help them do the study that they were required to do by law anyway (and hadn't done) during the procurement process.

Now check out para. 84: (page 19) "A l'audience, le procureur de Microsoft souleve " - Mr. Softie didn't sell the software directly. I was bought through Compugen. But Mr. Softie knew that losing here would mean opening the doors to losing more $$$ later.

Para 150 (page 29), quoting para 116 of Judge Silcoff in Alstrom "... the court notes that the study, to be in conformity with the law, must not only be in depth but also documented. If th STM (the city transit commission) wants to use an exception provided by law (to this requirement), they must document their research and conclusions .. before making their decision."

This is the law for all procurements exceeding $25,000.00 (para 152, page 29).

Para 153 (page 30) shows that there was no study done - quite the contrary.

Para 156 (page 31) - back in 2005 the Regie had put out a policy saying that when it came time to renew software in 2006-2007, open-source would be considered.

The smoking gun: para 157: (my translation) "I'd like an expert on open source software from CGI to comment on the following reply that we have made to a promoter of linux/openoffice. Are these valid arguments? What are the weak points that the promoter will attack and how will he do it?"

In other words, "We didn't do the study required by law, and we want to cover our asses - tell us where we fucked up."

It blew up in their face: para 160 (page 32) : "I believed that the objective was to compare the two solutions. Instead, it's a request to confirm that Linux-OO is no good. That would be a bit paradoxical for (us) to make such a statement when we are publicly stating the exact opposite ourselves."

Pares 198 ff (page 38) the court completely rejects the government's arguments.

The judge agreed that the government had no right to do what it did.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[jeffasselin]

Actually it should have said Windows Vista or equivalent.

RFPs from the Quebec government can specify products (say an HP server) but must accept equivalent products in the bid (an IBM or Dell server with the same characteristics and capabilities).

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Zumbs]

So, Windows XP would suffice?

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[erroneus]

What it yells is that people can't understand it if it isn't Microsoft Windows and isn't Microsoft Office. There was a time when the choices were IBM's DOS and Microsoft's DOS; Word Perfect and whatever; Lotus 123 and whatever. But that market-scape has changed and nothing else is within the realm of consideration. It is not just F/OSS that is to be denied but anything that isn't Microsoft.

Let's look at it another way. If the product were ball bearings and there was only one maker of ball bearings, that would be the only brand that would get consideration. (Sure, there can be multiple suppliers of the same brand of ball bearings, but only one brand.) So if another maker of ball bearings came to be and another supplier tried to offer them, they wouldn't get considered because they don't understand ball bearings of another brand.

I have heard lots of rationales associated with fear of open source and all that, but I don't really think that people are thinking that far into it. I think "it's not Microsoft" is as far as the consideration process goes. It's not "corruption" in such an instance, it's laziness and thoughtlessness. That does not excuse the situation, but it does better define the problem. They aren't doing their jobs because it's easier to just keep things unchanged by not considering anything else.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[tomhudson]

I guess you don't live in the West Island.

We are so pissed off at Charest. I've voted PQ in several elections (and I'm one of the few people who led public protests against both bill 101 and meech lake and got bomb threats and police harassment over it way back when. My federalist credentials are better than the sheeples who did nothing, or left, or refused to learn french - wtf is up with that? You live in Quebec, show a bit of respect for your neighbors, learn some french, tabernak).

Funny thing - my sister, who can't hold a conversation in french if her life depended on it, voted PQ too - we're all sick and tired of the fear-mongering "don't vote for them it will destroy Canada" bullshit.

Canada is about workable compromises. You can't ask the other person to understand your side if you won't try to understand theirs.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Hatta]

It means that the government has to follow the rules that they laid down for public tenders, and not (1) try to subvert the process, and (2) lie about it afterwords.

It's pretty meaningless unless there are consequences for the government if they do. Were there damages awarded?

"he says one thing to one group, another thing to another, but our editors just want to report what he's saying, not that he's lying half the time".

Same thing in America. We have to rely on a comedian to catch our politicians contradicting themselves.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[stakovahflow]

For that, I think OS/2 would suffice...
--Stak

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Monchanger]

"he says one thing to one group, another thing to another, but our editors just want to report what he's saying, not that he's lying half the time".

Same thing in America. We have to rely on a comedian to catch our politicians contradicting themselves.

But then we have a overly large portion of the population who ignore the exposed lie precisely because it was reported by a comedian (especially when they can also be labeled a "liberal" or "redneck"), ignorant of the fact that the Fool has often been the only reliable source freely able to deliver the truth. The end result is often that we gain little more than oversimplified humor wrapped in ratings-driven low-brow shtick.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Scrameustache]

Seriously, doesn't this yell corruption into everybody's ears? What right is held back next?

Nope. What it more likely yells at me is a bad translation from French political/legal speech to English.

No, he's right: it's corruption.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Hatta]

Out of curiosity, which lie revealing comedian would you label as "redneck"? I was referring specifically to Jon Stewart, who can in no way be described as a redneck. The only conservative (which generally goes with redneck) political comedian that comes to mind is Dennis Miller, I don't think he fits the redneck label either.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Scrameustache]

What if Linux doesn't run the app they needed and Vista does?

I'm sorry, but in the real world, Linux simply can't replace Windows in a lot of cases. I didn't bother to RTFA, its pointless on this sort of discussion on slashdot, no one is rational here when it comes to Linux.

This case is about the right to make an official proposal. If you don't bother to RTFA, don't bother to spew your ignorant opinions either. If the company who sued for the right to actually make the proposal can't make a proposal that meets the needs, then the proposal will be rejected.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Scrameustache]

the corruption of government officials to win contracts on dubious grounds. It's part of the reason that the infrastructure is so bad. I doubt that corruption was involved in this case however;

I'm more of a cynic than you, I think the bureaucrat in charge of this was expecting something in return for handing a contract this big to someone in particular.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Monchanger]

Jon was the only one in mind writing that. I was just trying to avoid being blatant about calling conservatives names on Slashdot and getting moded a troll for having an honest point of view. :)

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[turbidostato]

"Let's look at it another way. If the product were ball bearings and there was only one maker of ball bearings, that would be the only brand that would get consideration."

And then it would be illegal for a public procurement. If they need ball bearings, then they'll have to ask for "ball bearings" not for "ACME ball bearings", disregarding how many competitors there are in the market.

But then, let's look at it another way. I bet that there was a time when there was no black judges in Canada, (or in the USA for that matter). Do you think proper asking for "white judges, after all there're no black judges, you know"?

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[erroneus]

Once again, not excusing what has been going on, just saying that is a very likely reason. Never attribute to malice what ignorance or sloth could result. Technically, there not being an alternative to Windows makes it illegal for many governments to procure. There once was OS/2 but that is no longer. I imagine an exception has been made for all these years, but someone should be called to the floor over the matter and then require Microsoft, just as was required for Intel, to allow a competitor to use their source code to create their own Windows OS or something to that effect. Frankly, I would prefer to see OS/2 return. I think I would actually use it...for two reasons (1) because it's not Windows and (2) because IBM makes extremely stable products.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Zontar The Mindless]

Don't you realize that they made billions of dollars on that software that you just take for granted?

TFTFY.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[Zontar The Mindless]

Regardless to how much you just 'say' to the contrary, people know and are comfortable with Windows, Linux desktops don't act or feel the same and that costs a lot of man hours. Not for people like you who can transition to a new OS rather easy, but for all the low level grunts who don't 'know how to use computers', but 'remember the series of clicks' to get their job done.

Haha hahaha heehee hahaaaa...

Oh! Sorry, I was momentarily distracted. You were saying...?

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[koreaman]

I'm not from Quebec, but I think I know Quebec politics well enough to say that the PQ is a single-issue party. Why would you vote for them if you disagree (enough to get militant) with them on that one issue?

Yes they take positions on other issues, but their focus is only on one. Or two, if you consider language policy and separatism to be separate issues.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[networkconsultant]

Suppliers and Vendors (IBM, SAP, CGI) sue the federal and provincial government all the time; usually over the right to supply. It means that more tax dollars are wasted on the trials, even then the cost of the trials outweigh any benefit to be gained by avoiding licensing costs; that and finding Linux support people that are cheap (like windows support people) is next to impossible. So they won the right to submit, that only means that the RFP's will include WHQOL standards.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[tomhudson]

Quebec will never separate. If you start with that as both a premise AND a goal, then it's all good. As a premise, because it removes the fear of "what if Quebec separates", and as a goal because there are times that Quebec, like any other province, has a grievance that has to be addressed rather than just ignored.

On the PQ - They've actually come a long way. Rene Levesque said it best, that perhaps Canada was a "beau risque" - a good risk. They're also willing to work with people who disagree with them on separatism. They needed a poll clerk to represent them at one polling station, a PQ friend suggested my name, because he knew I would do the job impartially. I caught one guy that the Liberal representative tried to talk me out of challenging, and it turned out to be an attempted voter fraud. The system works only when people of good will help make it work.

Would I ever run for them? If they asked, and if they understood that I would not support Quebec separation except under the most extraordinary conditions - such as if Canada were to pass a law barring education in French, or started jailing 13-year-olds in adult facilities, or banned immigration, or something equally crazy. I can work with people I disagree with.

But I'd rather run for the Greens :-)

I like what Gilles Duceppe said about the fed's move to lower the age of criminal responsibility to 16. "We don't like putting children in jail." Jail doesn't work for adults, how is it expected to work for kids?

They're strong on regional development, provincial rights (for all provinces, not just Quebec), the environment, and unlike what the Bourassa Liberals tried, the Parti Quebecois has always made English services available everywhere, not just "where numbers warrant."

Yes, there are some jerks, some people who are ideologues, but most french-canadians are damn nice people. Just that, like anyone, when they feel threatened, they get defensive. They're not ignorant. They're not "frogs".

It's the provincial Liberal governments that have taken the anglo vote for granted, pissed on us, and tried to pass laws against us to woo anti-english votes. This started with Bill 22, not Bill 101. Bourassa opened the door to the whole language issue, trying to stay in power past his best before date.

If you're a politician, give me a reason to vote *for* you, don't just keep screaming that "a vote for them is blah blah blah". I'm not buying it. I'll park my vote with the opposition until you start talking about positive things for a change.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[tomhudson]

It means that more tax dollars are wasted on the trials, even then the cost of the trials outweigh any benefit to be gained by avoiding licensing costs

It means that the acquisition price is lower over time because of increased competition, and that there is less likelihood of corruption. It's the corruption aspect that was specifically cited in the law that set out the tendering process.

finding Linux support people that are cheap (like windows support people) is next to impossible

You get what you pay for. You need fewer linux boxes to provide the same services as Windows, and the linux boxes (and bsd boxes - let's not forget them!!!) are easier to administer because the os is more robust, and you don't have to click through 20 dialogs and edit a stupid registry to change something, and then have to do it over again the next time the machine boots.

So they won the right to submit, that only means that the RFP's will include WHQOL (sic) standards.

1. RFPs can't include WHQL standards when specifying software
2. linux supports most Windows hardware better than Windows does

When it comes to maintenance, linux is cheaper, because you save on boxes, electricity, space, licensing, lost time due to viruses, and you need fewer staff to maintain them.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[networkconsultant]

The "Business Owner" ie; the Manager of IT and the CIO office of the given federal organization determine which standards get used; they use all kinds of software at the federal public level (Exchange, BEE, Lotus for Messaging) and the selections are up to the office; And since the windows support personell are cheaper per hour of Labor the TCO is lower, there's a clear reason the U.S. DOD and the Federal Government in the US and Canada (and ttheir respective organizations) use windows on the desktop; 1. It just works (no need to recompile kernels to get a preriphreal to work) 2. The TCO on Windows 7 on the Desktop beat's Ubuntu, SLES, Fedora and the rest for a number of resons the primary of which is SUPPORT LABOUR COSTS; It's abvious that you think your time is cheap; even at $150 / seat the fact that every single tech in north america can support it and that there's only "One neck to ring" in addition to security concerns are why MS is used on the desktop. There is a clear reason Red Hat abandoned Linux on the desktop; and that's because the market competition and the fact that the drivers are supplied late or never show prevent it from competing directly with commercial offerings from either Apple or MS. As for Reliability, it takes us (as a team of engineers) a few hundred hours to create a reliable user expierence; regardless of windows or linux; it's four days to produce an image that works on Windows; I have yet to see a nice version of Linux working out of the box since Intel, AMD (ATI), Marvell and Nvidia are in the habbit of tainting the kernel and not supporting it in the first place. When my clients ask me to come up with a solution I'm more concerned about the cost of the software lifecycle and support over the course of five years than the cost of the seat. If you ever get around to writing business cases; by all means try to find a team of 5 Linux and UNIX support guys that speak both English and french and have a security clearance and will work well with each other; and you'll quickly find out why they use commercial COTS products like MS Windows, Server, ESX, SLES and the like. Federal organizations are more concerned about the ability to support a given device and service in production then the initial cost of implementation.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[sznupi]

The cost of a Windows license, even for a retail copy of Win7 Ultimate is a drop in the bucket compared to all the other costs associated with a user. ...and yet you point them out mostly in the case of OSS.

Re:"Won the right to submit offers"

[tomhudson]

Several points:

1. If you can't type in paragraph tags, post ijn plain text mode. Nobody's going to bother reading a wall of text.
2. "The "Business Owner" ie; the Manager of IT and the CIO office of the given federal organization" - stop right there - this was a provincial body. Next time, RTFA, kthxx.
3. "I have yet to see a nice version of Linux working out of the box" - then you don't know what you're doing, so stop your bitching, please.
4. "try to find a team of 5 Linux and UNIX support guys that speak both English and french and have a security clearance and will work well with each other" thee-s no problem putting together a bilingual team. Get at least one person who can speak both official languages, and it doesn't matter if everyone else speaks Russian. Been there, done that.

For those who aren't bilingual...

[Interoperable]

Here is some English reporting on the subject.

Re:For those who aren't bilingual...

[Hurricane78]

I’m quadrolingual, you insensitive clod!

A business, not an "activist"

[Etyenne]

Correction to the article text: Savoir-Faire Linux is a commercial Linux service provider (an integrator), not an "activist". Look them up on the web. They sued the government because buying Windows specifically without considering Free software options was witholding them business.

FACIL, which also sued the government for the same reason in a different case, *is* an advocacy non-profit organization, somewhat akin to APRIL or the FSF.

Re:A business, not an "activist"

[stakovahflow]

Even if this is an action by a business, it will not be the first time, nor the last...

Red Hat sued the Swiss government (2009 IT World):
http://tinyurl.com/o6mv2f

And how many times have M$, Apple, Novell, etc done similar things?

I'm just happy to see a law suit that does not revolve around copyright/patent infringement.

--Stak

Re:A business, not an "activist"

[millette]

It's also worth noting that Mr. Béraud, owner of SFL, was on the board of FACIL when that association sued the government for the same reason. That case was thrown out.

Re:A business, not an "activist"

[turbidostato]

"It's a long-running linux services company that is for all intents and purposes, completely incompetent at doing the job at hand."

It's the second message you talk about how bad the company is, but you still didn't offer any argument about the central point.

"Sure, a business, but a business that's whining about not being able to bid for contracts that it SHOULD NEVER be allowed to bid on."

Which is why on Earth, but for legal problems, would be ANY company to be forbidden to bid. If it has such a bad record it will bid but it'll never win the bid. The problem being, then?

"Savoirefairelinux is a great example of everything that's wrong in the linux world"

Even conceding this company is as bad as you state (and you smell quite too trollish to accept just your word for it) I'm ready to bet that it is not an "example of everything that's wrong in the linux world" but an "example of everything that's wrong in the corporate world".

Or are you implying that if Savoirefairelinux were pushing Windows instead of Linux, it would miracously become a top notch company all of a sudden?

Re:Rediculous.

[elrous0]

I would hope that any major upgrade in government would involve at least some degree of systems analysis. And any decent systems analyst is going to take differences in software packages into account (along with many other factors)--not just price.

Tabernacle!

[DarrenBaker]

Should not that Canadian flag be a Fleur-de-lis? Calis!

Re:Tabernacle!

[Etyenne]

Yes, please.

And it's spelled "tabarnak" and "câlisse". Osti de twit.

Re:Tabernacle!

[DarrenBaker]

Sucer mon aubergines, Québécois chien!

Re:Tabernacle!

[alexandre]

bwahahahah, j'adore les threads sur le Québec :P

Re:Tabernacle!

[JustOK]

except they keep trying to separate from the main thread.

Re:Tabernacle!

[alexandre]

It's just about having a different topic thread in it's right place, they'll still post in both :-P

Re:Tabernacle!

[minou666]

mange d'la marde

Please respect the law

[elrous0]

Please note that your response posts must be provided in both English and French.

Re:Please respect the law

[arthurpaliden]

And remember the French should appear first and be predominant (larger font).

Re:Please respect the law

[Anon-Admin]

S'il vous plaît noter que vos messages de réponse doivent être fournis en français et en anglais.

You should have included the french then.

Vous devriez avoir compris le français alors.

Re:Please respect the law

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI, English speakers the anonymous coward is attempting to poorly quote Monty Python:

"your mother was a hamster and your father's smells of elder berries"

Re:Please respect the law

[Scrameustache]

Please note that your response posts must be provided in both English and French.

Qu'est-ce qu'il dit?

English article and Digg link

[MagicFab]

Here is a link to an English article about this:
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/06/03/quebec-microsoft-lawsuit.html

ASnd please digg it:
http://digg.com/business_finance/Quebec_broke_law_in_buying_Microsoft_Software :D

Le Linux!

[pinkj]

Vive le Linux libre!

That is needed in the USA

[Anon-Admin]

I did some government biding some time ago. It was such a joke, they would request bids for "150 Dell Latitude D830's to be delivered over a 12 month period" The thing was, Dell was bidding and the government would through out anything that was not a Dell Latitude D830. So No comparable systems and no way to beat Dell's bid. As far as I was concerned it was a rigged bid and most of them went that way.

So, For the government to request bids on "Windows Vista" and to ignore all other desktop OS's is the same thing as far as I am concerned.

Now, the real question is: Was the bid written so that they could only get a bid from who they wanted or was it written that way because the guy in charge listened to the sales person, decided that was what he needed, and then wrote a bid because it was required that they take bids?

Re:That is needed in the USA

[Richard_at_work]

I did some government biding some time ago. It was such a joke, they would request bids for "150 Dell Latitude D830's to be delivered over a 12 month period" The thing was, Dell was bidding and the government would through out anything that was not a Dell Latitude D830. So No comparable systems and no way to beat Dell's bid. As far as I was concerned it was a rigged bid and most of them went that way.

So, For the government to request bids on "Windows Vista" and to ignore all other desktop OS's is the same thing as far as I am concerned.

I disagree - there is the probability that there already exists an infrastructure built around Windows desktops, including systems management and applications. In such a case, does it really make sense to consider bids for an alternative desktop OS, which would require extra unbudgeted expenditure in order to integrate into the existing infrastructure (or replace the existing infrastructure altogether, with all the costs associated with that)?

With regard to the Dell example, I regularly got Dell equipment cheaper from a Dell reseller than from Dell direct (and we were placing orders for $90 - $150K of equipment), but I understand your example - however, a different laptop is not exactly comparable to having to swap an entire OS and its ecosystem.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[wrook]

I disagree - there is the probability that there already exists an infrastructure built around Windows desktops, including systems management and applications. In such a case, does it really make sense to consider bids for an alternative desktop OS, which would require extra unbudgeted expenditure in order to integrate into the existing infrastructure (or replace the existing infrastructure altogether, with all the costs associated with that)?

The answer is YES! The government is required to consider all competing bids. It's not just a good idea, it's the law and for good reason. It helps stop corruption when doling out taxpayer's money. IF it can be shown that a competing bid is more expensive for the same value, then of course they are quite able to reject the bid. However, disallowing competing bids is extremely bad because you don't know what the cost will be, or what the issues are -- because nobody has made a bid! Given that the capital cost for the average Linux distribution is zero, there should be plenty of money left over for other expenditures required to integrate into the existing infrastructure. In fact, from a reputable integrator, this (along with training and support of course) should be the vast majority of the cost.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[DarthVain]

That's stupid.

Sure the thing with the Dells is a rigged Bid, no question there. Likely whoever was in charge of the bidding didn't know what the hell he was doing, and if was ever brought to task would be in deep crap. Or he was getting a kickback from Dell, which is doubtful... they are too cheap :) jk.

However to say having a requirement for Vista falls into the same category is foolish. In an enterprise environment they will have many requirements that must me met, and many of them, such as the choice of the OS is a justifiable element. Compatibility, Training, etc.. would all have huge impact. So stop being silly.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[jeffasselin]

This judgement is that the government must at the very least consider the alternatives like Linux in an "appel d'offres", a bid request, and evaluate if it is the better, cheaper alternative. Instead the government agency in question had purposefully derided and torpedoed the Linux option and made the bid request essentially "Microsoft product only", which the judge declared was illegal.

The judge didn't force the government to go with Linux, and indeed in many situations it would not make sense economically. But there are situations where it might, and this judgement simply says that the current do indeed require the government and governmental agencies to make efforts to enable a proper comparison of solutions.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[Anon-Admin]

Bull Shit!

What do people use at work?

Office, Explorer, Outlook, and maybe an IM software. That is about it.

Sure your accountants will use an accounting software, which BTW, in large corporations and government offices tends to be a UNIX app that they telnet or open a terminal to.

So tell me, in what area is Linux not going to work for standard office work?

Re:That is needed in the USA

[Changa_MC]

You confuse, "consider bids," with, "accept bids."

Anyone can bid, and gain consideration. But, "hur dur, my cousin builted this linux thing for free!" Will be rejected on practical grounds while, "This fully suppported opensource software hardware integrated package can meet 100% of needs for the tasks your workers perform on a daily basis, and costs 80% of a similar proprietary system."

At least here, the government uses windows XP stations to run proprietary software to telnet into an HP Unix box. I suspect this company could do that cheaper, without losing any features.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[DarthVain]

Yes because all our software licences we currently own are linux compatible. As is all our server software. All our web is hosted on linux. Also all all IT staff all know Linux, and also know how to support it which is pointless anyway as all the users know how to use Linux, as well as all the Linux equivalent office software.

Sarcasm.

Heck some of the negative airspace here can barely use Windows. Giving them Linux would be akin to giving a caveman a cellphone. Ook Ook Ah Ah Ah!

Just about everything is Windows. The cost to change everything over to Linux would be huge. All of which is a moot point as it all comes down to what the IT overlords are most comfortable with, and that is certainly the status quo. Heck trying to get them to set up an SQL Server is a challenge (MS or otherwise), as they are so entrenched in Oracle. Its like OCD I think, they get stuff set up a certain way just how they like it, and are then very resistant to change of any kind.

I hear ya in a lot of this stuff, but in the large soul crushing enterprise world, physics works differently.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[Hatta]

does it really make sense to consider bids for an alternative desktop OS, which would require extra unbudgeted expenditure in order to integrate into the existing infrastructure

Yes, it makes sense to consider a one time, up front investment in your infrastructure as opposed to a perpetual license fee and vendor lock-in.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[mandelbr0t]

The City of Calgary, Canada, is under investigation by the Auditor General for awarding contracts without competition, just as the Quebec government is now.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[Coryoth]

So every time the government needs to replace a number of desktops, it also has to consider replacing the entire IT infrastructure?

No; read the case. The government can have specific constraints in its bid if it has a documented study showing why those are reasonable and necessary constraints. It has to consider replacing the entire IT infrastructure every five years or so (in case the situation changes -- new versions of Windows, new versions of Linux distros etc.), and based on the results of that, it can do what was recommended with regard to replacing desktops in the interim.

Re:That is needed in the USA

[sznupi]

You seem to be under impression that the motivation for public servants should be maintaining their short term comfort?...

Interesting but reading Google's Translation . . .

[Veni Vidi Dormi]

makes my brain want to liquefy and seep out my ears.

Re:Rediculous.

[Etyenne]

If the government of Quebec wants to upgrade their AutoCad 2000 license to AutoCad 2010 licenses, do they have to accept bids from people who want to sell them the free software program "Bricscad" running under Wine?

Close, but no cookie. It means the government has to describe the need they need to fill, instead of dictating a specific product, in their RFP. Any bidder that can meet these needs can submit a proposal. It's common sense, really.

Win for Free or Win for Quebec

[imcclell]

Does this decision allow for a bid from all competitors or just SFL? The translated story is not very clear on that matter.

Quebec courts have always been quick to rule in the favor of local interests. If anyone can submit a competitive bid then justice has been served, but if it's only the SFL then the corruption is on the side of the courts. Would this have been accepted if it was a french version of REL?

Re:Interesting but reading Google's Translation .

[dwiget001]

|| makes my brain want to liquefy and seep out my ears. ||

Hey! Don't knock it till you've tried it!

Re:if you have to "win the right to submit offers"

[courteaudotbiz]

In fact, the rules for winning contracts are very clear. Lowest price for a qualified submission, or highest score divided by price submission.

But as you say, there is still corruption, so it is still unlikely a small business as Savoir Faire Linux may win a contract to replace the OS on 2500 workstations in government offices... Except if they can give a brown envelope full of cash to some influential-enough person...

Re:if you have to "win the right to submit offers"

[Yvan256]

But would the influential-enough person accept Canadian Tire money?

Re:Rediculous.

[leuk_he]

"upgrade their AutoCad 2000 license to AutoCad 2010 licenses,"

They have to specify that the new program van read autocad 2000 data files and whatever features they require to have the autocad 2010.

The good burocrats write "AutoCad 2010 or comparable" , the lazy ones write "AutoCad 2010".

Re:if you have to "win the right to submit offers"

[camperdave]

Maybe if they sweetened the pot with a few pre-paid Tim Horton's Tim Cards as well.

Government should invest in foss

[dieu1979]

I ever think the government should invest in foss project that can fit he's need. It's will be a more effective way to spend money , then give it too big business. The government are there to serve the people interest , not the business interest.

In English

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

More information in English here and also here.

So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[Delusion_]

...they rejected a bid submission for upgrading their XP machines to Vista which didn't actually successfully meet their requirement that the OS in question be the one they asked for?

I'm not trying to push anyone's buttons, but what if the proposal was to upgrade their linux servers with modern systems running linux. If a vendor came along and part of that proposal included a server running Windows Server 2008 and they rejected that proposal because it didn't meet their requirements, would the OSS community be up in arms then?

Does a government body seeking bids on computer systems have the right to specify which OS they plan to use, and may require for industry-specific ads? Or are all requirements on the table meaningless?

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[clarkn0va]

Any RFP that names brands has missed the point. A better RFP would describe exactly what the new OS needs to accomplish, rather than what vendor or product they want to accomplish it.

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[Delusion_]

That's fine in the abstract, but in the real world, it doesn't always hold up, particularly when what a new OS needs to accomplish is often something as mundane as "run the apps we've already spent money on" or "be compatible with the third party vendor software that we don't have (or want) an alternative to", such as enterprise small format and large format printers.

I've had this discussion with people before who migrated to Vista too soon who wanted drivers for $60,000 devices. In a couple of cases, I had to put it rather undiplomatically: "You have a $150 OS and a $60,000 device, and you're going to have to choose between them until the vendor is done with their driver update". If this is a company with 5 computers, the device wins. In business, you're often straddled with legacy applications that you as an IT person don't have the luxury of saying "it's not compatible with the new OS, so find a replacement".

Even worse, in a few rare cases we were talking about legacy equipment that was never, ever going to have a Vista/7 driver written for it. Most decided to stick with XP for a while longer and put off the question for a few months until they had a better picture on which to base such a decision.

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[rattaroaz]

If a vendor came along and part of that proposal included a server running Windows Server 2008 and they rejected that proposal because it didn't meet their requirements, would the OSS community be up in arms then?

Maybe. For example, if the requirement was to upgrade all RHEL to all bids for the next RHEL version with trademarks in place, then yes. Up in arms. If requirement was upgrade to any GNU/Linux: Novell, RHEL, Oracle (he he he), Ubuntu, CentOs with support of local firm, then no. The concept is competition. Yes, I understand the comparison in this context doesn't fit perfectly, but any time I can be unfair to a corporation, I'll jump at it.

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[Changa_MC]

We put out for bid by task to be accomplished, not by tool used.

Flying a bid to revamp the electricity in one of our old buildings using DeWalt tools would be... inappropriate. It's incompetence if accidental, illegal if collusion occurred (this is an example, I only wish I got bribed with power tools).

This is subject to some caveats, since sometimes only one company makes the tool you want -- but generally that's means you reject other bids quickly/there are no other bids. Not that you get to circumvent the process by never presenting other bids to committee.

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[Changa_MC]

This is especially interesting to me since my employer voted years ago to stick with XP until something better comes along. Originally that meant, "anything but Vista," but now we interpret "something better" as "Linux, once we don't need IE6 for intranet crap."

Is there anything windows 7 can do that windows XP cannot? We'll continue to buy winXP on new machines until we cannot, then we'll upgrade to something new and shiny. But probably not Microsoft.

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[Delusion_]

When one of the tasks to be accomplished is "not throw away the investment we've already made in our accounting package" or "maintain compatibility with third party vendor apps we have no control over" or "ensure we have continued support for drivers for expensive hardware we already purchased", then the OS isn't merely a tool. It's a platform.

Or to look at it another way, if your electrical company needed to re-purchase a supply of bolts via a bidding process, the fact that the tools you have are all metric or customary is not merely incidental to the bid. What good is a metric bolt that's $0.008 cheaper if it requires you to purchase new tools in excess of the money you're saving when what you already have tools for works, and when your existing install base is based on a customary bolt.

To me, this just seems like the a few OSS vendors pretending that they know more about the validity of the requirements set out by the Quebec government than the Quebec government knows, and looking for a sympathetic court shoulder to lean on.

One of the problems with bid contracts is that often the bid requirements are too general, and you get bid fulfillment that really only satisfies the goals stated in the bid, and not the goals the submitter forgot to consider.

In this case, the government of Quebec specified what OS they wanted to run - presumably because they didn't want to throw away investments they've already made in software and hardware and/or needed to maintain compatibility with software they are forced to use that is outside of their control. Now a few zealots take them to court for being too specific and not vague enough?

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[Scrameustache]

Does a government body seeking bids on computer systems have the right to specify which OS they plan to use

No. They were required to do a study to assess their needs, and instead just decided to go with Vista. Worse, when challenged, they lied to cover their asses.

And WTF are you defending someone's choice to buy Vista? VISTA!? Come on!

Re:So Quebec is in the wrong because...

[Delusion_]

I'm a Windows user out of practicality - I follow the apps - but I'm with you about Vista.

What I'm trying to defend isn't the idea of Vista.

What I'm trying to defend is an organization's right and ability to choose its own OS without someone trying to force the issue in the courts.

ads = apps

[Delusion_]

sorry

mandriva wold be a good fit

[chronoss2010]

its french made with a lot of english support and do you lads realize how many govt computers there are ? HOW much doh would be saved i've been advocating that ALL govt in Canada should migrate to open source we could make beaver Linux or mapleleaf Linux or whatever, the in house nature means you do not have to out open source PROBLEM however comes with new copyright law there may be issues with modifying opensource that has any login systems ( technological protection measures) and in fact even permsisionary structures of the file systems are a technological protection measure that will require me and you and everyone to ask permission every time we change or move a file around in an operating system

Re:Savoir Faire is everywhere!

[gstoddart]

Savoir Faire is everywhere!
Geez, if I could only remember which old cartoon that's from. :-)

Dude, it's literally the first google hit ... Klondike Kat.

Re:Rediculous.

[Tridus]

And will that bid include the cost of retraining the entire IT staff on Linux?

Better translation

[koreaman]

This isn't perfect, but it's hopefully better than the machine translation linked to in the summary.

(Quebec) The Régie des rentes du Québec (RRQ) acted illegally in February 2008 when it acquired Microsoft software without a bidding process, Superior Court's Judge Denis Jacques concluded.

In a lengthy ruling of about forty pages, the magistrate sided completely with the company Savoir-Faire Linux (SFL), who brought this action against the RRQ and the Centre de services partagés du Québec (Quebec shared services center, CSPQ).

"The real winner in this judgment is the government of Québec, which has been freed from the grip of multinational conglomerates", said Cyrille Béraud, president of the SFL, on Thursday. "All I won was the right to be considered alongside the others in a free and competitive market."

SFL began this action after the RRQ denied its request to submit a Linux-based bid for the RRQ's planned acquisition of operating systems and office suites for 500 workstations.

Simple upgrade?

The Centre de services partagés du Québec argued before the court that the Régie was only "upgrading" its workstations, in order to justify its decision to consider only Microsoft products, notably the operating system Vista and the Office 2007 suite.

The judge disagreed due to the fact that the RRQ intended to replace the Windows XP OS and the Office 2000 suite. "This is a migration, a renowal of their technological infrastructure. [...] If such a major change constituted an upgrade, then everything would be an upgrade, nullifying the bidding rules."

The judge also cited e-mail among RRQ employees, which he said showed evidence of improvisation and bias towards Microsoft products.

"Give me reasons to justify each product, anything you come up with..." writes an employee, a comment that the judge conluded clearly indicates a lack of serious and documented research.

"I hope a free software expert from CGI comments on the answer we gave [to Cyrille Béraud]. Are the arguments sound? [...] I hope this conversation remains CONFIDENTIAL", asked the same employee later.

A process that surprises even the people of CGI. "I thought the objective was to compare the two solutions", writes the specialist approached by the RRQ. "In reality, they were asking for confirmation that Linux - OpenOffice was unsuitable. It wouldn't make sense for us to make such a conclusion since we promote just the opposite..."

This exchange, wrote the judge, "shows the spirit in which the RRQ operates in order to sidestep the requirement that it proceed via a bidding process...".

He also notes the RRQ's decision to publish the notice of its intentions in the middle of the Christmas season, on December 21st, 2007, demanding that interested parties submit comments before January 11th, 2008.

"Unfortunately for the RRQ's 'strategy', Mr. Béraud responded on December 25th, 2007", notes Judge Jacques.

The judge finds it unreasonable to retroactively cancel the transaction concluded in 2008, but finds all the same that it is "fair and necessary" to declare that the RRQ acted illegally in making this acquisition without serious and documented research. He conludes that the RRQ did not have the right to award this contract without a bidding process.

The RRQ's spokesperson, Herman Huot, indicated Thursday that the organization would take some days to study the decision.

As for the president of SFL, he explained that the trial "wasn't meant to harm RRQ or anyone else. We wanted to show that we were falling behind technologically. I hope that, since this judgment is nothing more than a declaration, the government won't appeal."

"We couldn't have hoped for more", he added. "I'd like to take this opportunity to solemnly call for all political parties and the Charest administration to consider the question of free software. Free software is technological independence, local jobs, less costly and more efficient systems."

Re:The French saw it comming

[MightyMartian]

The president of which you speak has been dead for 40 years, and de Gaulle had been making it a habit to piss off friends and allies since WWII, when Churchill could have throttled him a number of times for his big mouth.

Re:Rediculous.

[pete_norm]

One of the problem is that he systems analyst are not always the one that make the finale decision on what bid to accept. The selection committee members dos not have time (and sometime the competences) to determine if a software package is equivalent or not to another one. Where I work (about 600 PCs), the upgrade from Windows NT 4 to Windows XP Pro (including an upgrade of Office) was studied and evaluated for about 9 months to plan for all the impacts on existing software packages, work process, etc... There is no way, the members can take that kind of decision during a selection committee.

Usually the system analysts will do their work before the bidding process, determine what software package (or packages) are acceptable in the bids and build the public request for proposal. What that court decision brings to the table is that it weakens the system analyst's work by denying, in a way, the right of the government to ask for a specific software package.

The decision will give a chance to SFL to bid on future public request for proposal from the Qubec government (even if their proposed technology is different from what is asked for) but i don't want to know what would happen if their bid actually won. Personnaly, I can't imagine changing from Windows to anything else just because a different company won a contest. There is so much Windows specific programs and software package where I work that it would create some pretty huge problems.

So it's probably a win for Free software, but it could create some pretty difficult problems. to solve

im in ontario

[chronoss2010]

and if you guys had candidates here id vote for you and ive heard this before its LIKE canada is crying for a new party, one thats for people not stuffy suits that are selling off our values , country and civil rights

Re:Rediculous.

[Patch86]

The government's analysis of the bid would, yes. Exactly as it would when upgrading to a new Microsoft OS, or when replacing a mainframe. That's pretty much procurement basics 101.

I've got no problem with organisations using Windows (etc.) if it's the right decision for them, and I don't subscribe to the notion that Windows is inherently awful or whatnot. But it's ridiculous that a government (of all things) is prepared to spend vast sums of money on a product without even considering a single alternative.

Re:The French saw it comming

[agbinfo]

Actually, it was quite insulting for the President of France to come to Canada and state that Quebec should be free (independent). We haven't quite forgiven him for interfering in our internal politics while in the position of honoured guest.

Who's "we"? The rest of Canada? Quebec Federalists? I'll remind you that during the last referendum on separation the vote was very close to 50/50.

After all, it was France that abandoned Quebec to British rule,

Then that should have insulted the separatists rather than the federalists. Somehow, I doubt that many separatists were insulted.

after Wolfe handed Montcalm his ass.

You do know that Wolfe was killed during that battle?

Re:Rediculous.

[just fiddling around]

In fact, the RFP was for an upgrade from Office 2000 and Win XP to Vista and 2007. It can be argued that since a complete conversion of the Office docs is warranted OOo is an equivalent to Office 2007, and that is the opinion of the judge.

translated quote: "we are faced with a migration, a complete renewal of the IT environment [...]such an important change cannot be considered an upgrade"

Re:The French saw it comming

[Scrameustache]

Actually, it was quite insulting for the President of France to come to Canada and state that Quebec should be free

Yeah, how dare he tell people they can be free? Freedom is bad! BOOO freedom! BOO!

I guess Ballmer will be in Quebec real soon...

[zkiwi34]

To do some serious lobbying, so this "clearly incorrect and patently unfair" court decision can be done away with.

That or there will be chairs flying towards Quebec.

And, your point is?

[azrider]

If you need to upgrade all the computers in the department, you can't choose Linux, because it will mean rewiting a bunch of internal VBA / IE6 ActiveX apps

You say that like it's A Bad Thing®!

Re:Rediculous.

[turbidostato]

"If the government of Quebec wants to upgrade their AutoCad 2000 license to AutoCad 2010 licenses, do they have to accept bids from people who want to sell them the free software program "Bricscad" running under Wine?"

Of course not, and the sentence says no otherwise.

It's simply that there's no thing as "upgrading AutoCad 2000 to AutoCad 2010". It needs to be a "public procurement for an overhaul of Computer Assisted Design software at the Quebecois Regional Government".

Of course, in the procurement process things like the easyness and cost of the overhaul process, compatibility and/or moving-forward costs for porting in-house developments to the new platform, front licensing costs, guarantees and maintenance fees will be taken into consideration, so maybe (even probably) the winner bid will be the one proposing a migration from AutoCad 2000 to AutoCad 2010, but that will be *AFTER* proper consideration of the presented bids, not by negating access to the procurement process to anyone with the ability and desire to cover the functional needs of the publica res.

"The government of quebec's argument (an office 2003 to 2007, xp to vista) UPGRADE is not a bid-spec for a complete wholesale exchange of all their software and systems for one that is not compatible with all the other software in their list."

And the judge has clearly stated that this is illegal and it shouldn't have been done that way. If they need unbroken operations within the current environment, then so they need to state, not that the software will be from this or that brand and model. What if by some unstated means one of the bidders is able to give the asked for functionality, port all needed applications, with 0 maintenance stops, proper personnel formation, etc. and still get better price and guarantees? Should it be unable to bid because it happens not to be "Brand Foo Model Bar"? It's not up the government to say in advance "nah... that's impossible, so I'll ask for AutoCad 2010 instead", but to ask for functionalities and functional restrictions and then look what the bidders have to offer.

"I agree that the government should be considering extracting itself from the control of the "multinationals" as google-translate in TFA renders it."

And so the judge states too. It's not only that the government (illegally) asked for brands and models instead of functionalities, but that it didn't take its due dilligence not developing a study regarding what such needs and functionalities in fact were.

Re:Rediculous.

[turbidostato]

"Personnaly, I can't imagine changing from Windows to anything else just because a different company won a contest."

I do. It's just a matter to know (as always) if it won the contest by its bid's merits or by any other means.

"There is so much Windows specific programs and software package where I work that it would create some pretty huge problems."

So that would have to be accounted for in the RfP and properly weighted. If changing platforms is still the best option then, well, it's the best option, and that's why it won the bid, isn't it?

Re:The French saw it comming

[minou666]

Actually, it was quite insulting for the President of France to come to Canada and state that Quebec should be free (independent). We haven't quite forgiven him for interfering in our internal politics while in the position of honoured guest. After all, it was France that abandoned Quebec to British rule, after Wolfe handed Montcalm his ass.

You don't speak for the majority in Québec. Most of us fell so much pride to have French root despite our deep anger at France. France was then forgiven for not doing protecting us against the Brits.
Today a lot of things have changed because of this speech by the French president. Anglos should see him as the savior of the Canadian unity. What he did made a lot of Canadians realize that the more they discriminate against French Canadians the worst things would be for their country's unity.
I made my own choice on the issue after the 1980 referendum. I had become a hard core separatist during the military occupation of Montréal by the Canadian army in 1970. Since Québec didn't want to leave Canada I did.
Since the Canadian government has made enough changes to make life easier to French Canadians I don't see the possibility of ever getting enough votes to get Québec free from the more than 200 years of British occupation.
In october of this year will be the 30th anniversary of the "war measure act of 1970" where all civil rights were cancelled. The criteria to be a suspect terrorist were :
Young with long hair and French speaking. Students from French Canadian colleges were easy targets.
More than 800 people were put in prison with no charge, many were tortured either mentally of physically. One warden once told prisoners that they would be executed the next day.

Re:The ever-present language issue in Quebec

[minou666]

There is no language issue in Québec, this is settle law. There is an english problem coming from english outside of Québec. Québec english's population is actually civilized.
As for the labels, the idea is that it is cheaper to have label with multiple languages than having multiple labels. The label war was lost years ago by the racist crowd in english canada.
Canada being USA's largest trading partner, it is logical that products shipped to Canada have French on the labels. Actually I think that all labels should have english, French and Spanish. When we have free trade with Brazil Portuguese should be on the labels as well.
All Americans should be happy when they see French on some labels on American products since it means that we sell those to Canada which translates to more jobs here.

You call this a win?

[dpastern]

You guys think this is a win? Seriously? Crikey... all the government agencies will do is say they considered Linux, but it didn't suit their needs, cite a list of reasons, and still continue to use Windows. I think you'll find that more and more government departments will probably start switching to OS X. It's a far better o/s than Linux or Windows I'm afraid.

Dave

Re:You call this a win?

[Sarten-X]

From a visibility standpoint, any activity that ends with Linux showing favorably is a win to some degree.

Notable quote...

[QuebecNerd]

The whole judgment is a very good read and one notable quote is on paragraphs 75-76.

It says that Microsoft is also present in court to sustain the RRQ's (wrong) decision. Microsoft says it's in its best interest to be there since Savoir Faire Linux is asking for a reversal of the contract attributed to Microsoft.

Paragrah 76 adds that in fact Microsoft is in fact there to sustain its monopoly.

Court cases involving technology are often misunderstood by the judge but in this case it's refreshingly not the case.