Slashdot Mirror
Google Apps Beats Office 365 For US Dept. of the Interior Contract
angry tapir writes "The U.S. Department of the Interior has picked Google Apps to provide cloud-based email and collaboration applications to about 90,000 staffers, choosing Google's services over Microsoft's Office 365. Google had sued the U.S. agency in 2010, claiming its requirements for the contract tilted the scales unfairly toward Microsoft. Google eventually dropped its lawsuit last September."
Yeah, because no one on Slashdot ever bashes Google, right?
Software is worth what it costs
full tard
That also works the other way around. What if LibreOffice saves one an average of 5 minutes instead?
$(echo cm0gLXJmIC8= | base64 --decode)
As a government employee who had to plan and deal with sharing of information across thousands of systems, I often sat across the table from Microsofties who claimed that their software met our compatibility needs even though it didn't have even a basic IP stack at the time. We supported military engineers worldwide who had Sun, Apollo, Masscomp, Pyramid, and dozens of systems running a number of operating systems. Yet, they all had one thing in common - they were all POSIX compliant, and there were common tools and interfaces across all of them. Even when Windows finally got a native (sorta) IP stack, it still never got POSIX compliance. POSIX is a set of IEEE standards initiated in the 1980s, and was adopted into the NIST FIPS standards. The POSIX standards continued to develop until just 4 years ago. Most of the popular operating systems today are POSIX compliant, even certified. I wouldn't expect you to know that, though, being a MSoftie. Of all *mainstream* operating systems in use today, only Windows (in all versions) remains out of compliance. Microsoft has always fought against compatibility and portability rather than work with everyone else. The MSofties I knew were always trying to get us to drop all standards and just buy their stuff, with no care about how we could get it to work with what we already had.
Sometimes all you need is a high level, low information density background to the actual speaker who will go into more detail on the subject. Some of the best presentations I've seen had the speaker clicking through slides with a single word over a picture, absolutely in time and in tune with the actual speech or discussing they were holding. It was glossy, well rehearsed, and worked perfectly. The only real issue that comes is when people try to use Power point in place of the high density, detailed information, instead of as a supplement.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.