Slashdot Mirror


Minnesota Moving To Microsoft's Cloud

An anonymous reader writes "The State of Minnesota is apparently the first state to move into the cloud, agreeing on a deal to have their messaging and collaboration services delivered through Microsoft's Business Online Productivity Suite. The thing the article doesn't tell you in detail is that the agreement precludes the use of open source software, which could have saved the taxpayers millions of dollars. And once such a large organization goes Microsoft, it's difficult to go back. Isn't it interesting that these developments occur right before elections, as senior officials are trying to keep their jobs with a new incoming administration? What do you think, Slashdotters? Is this a good move for Minnesota? Or a conservative move that bucks the trend of saving money and encouraging open government and transparency by aligning philosophy and practice with at least the option of utilizing open source software?"

3 of 345 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Initial cost is a small piece of the cost by slashqwerty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    someone at the MN governor's office can pick up the phone and say "WTF? HELP" and they WILL get support. If fact for a big contract like this they will probably get tier 1 first class "ass kissing and tripping over themselves to try to fix it" level of support, oh and from a SINGLE vendor.

    The governor could get better support from his own in-house staff. My employer uses BPOS. We have 20,000 people on it, yet we have terrible support. The state of Minnesota has 36,000 employees. Something tells me the difference is not significant enough to get better support.

  2. Re:Initial cost is a small piece of the cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A few numbers to back you up:

    Where I work in local government, our IT budget is $90 million. A little under $2 million of that goes to Microsoft directly. Our Unix/Linux guys start at a pay rate that's probably 20% or so higher than the Windows guys that get hired.

    Sure, we could save some up-front money to Microsoft, but some of it would still go to Red Hat (all production Linux servers run RHEL, as CentOS is authorized only for test environments), and the admins would have to be retrained or replaced at rates that run higher than the existing ones. It would get ugly very, very fast.

    Note: I spend about 70% of my day on a Linux notebook.

  3. Re:Initial cost is a small piece of the cost by Ironhandx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Thats the unfortunate thing about MS. Its all politics on the inside. There is no "Big Microsoft Machine"

    In general I've found that much better support was to be had(when necessary) if you got the person that was in charge of making the decision to buy the licenses to call the SALES office. Not the support office. I had one of the managers in the tech support department call me back inside 2 hours with a solution to the problem we were having once I went that route. If anyone else had called in it would have taken 3-4 days minimum, if we ever got anything at all.