I dont mean to sound like an A-Hole but.
In the real world of govt and business you want your fleet or equipment to be the same so you can train on it.
The example you gave while I see your point even if somebody decided to copy the crown vic now they just broke the law (by copying sombody elese product to the T) or it would be different enough not to be stadard.
The govt agency also has to look at the support of the product. If they company copied the crown vic and supplied it and then went out of business who would support the product on recalls, warantee, ect.
Where this becomes a littel fair is the govt doesn't buy these cars from Ford, They accept quotes from dealers and pick the dealer who offers the best price.
I deal with this every day in my line of work where the dominant player Allen Bradly gets spec'd and they dont even consider alternatives as they are traind on this product.
What most people are missing is that they are not only allowing Microsoft to quote, they are asking for a quote from anyone and will pick the lowest option. They are only specifing that it has to be for a Microsoft solution.
As for restricting to a Microsoft product this is done on almost all RFQ's.
Police departments Restric RFQ to Ford Crown vics because that is the vehicle they have a support network for.
CA CHP restricted their firearms RFQ to S&W 4006 because that is the only weapon they have straind and have repair people for. (This one went thru multiple appeals from other gun vendors, in the end the state mad it case that it was unsafe to support multiple weapon platforms in training and equipment)
The DOD purchases Cisco hardware and its RFQ only support Cisco hardware. This is because all the training is done on Cisco hardware and we can just re-train every time they purchase anothe grup of equipment.
I deal with local govt that request a quote for a VFD, PLC, Contactors, Pilot devices and they specify the devices have to be A-B as this is what they have standardized to. This restricts it to a platform.
They have people trained on a platform Microsoft, If they had to change or support multiple programs just to be fair the cost would be prohibitive.
I know people hate Microsoft but it is a defacto standard in the IT industry since there are so many people trained on how to support.
I agree that the Blackberry is scarry for this as it is routed thru a foreign country.
But the NSA might like this as they will be able to spy on the Pres Communications as they are routed thru the foreign country.
And they already allow the military to use blackberys as they used to be the only device that was approved. They now have windows mobile devices that can meet the standard.
Slashdot Mirror
I dont mean to sound like an A-Hole but. In the real world of govt and business you want your fleet or equipment to be the same so you can train on it. The example you gave while I see your point even if somebody decided to copy the crown vic now they just broke the law (by copying sombody elese product to the T) or it would be different enough not to be stadard. The govt agency also has to look at the support of the product. If they company copied the crown vic and supplied it and then went out of business who would support the product on recalls, warantee, ect. Where this becomes a littel fair is the govt doesn't buy these cars from Ford, They accept quotes from dealers and pick the dealer who offers the best price. I deal with this every day in my line of work where the dominant player Allen Bradly gets spec'd and they dont even consider alternatives as they are traind on this product.
What most people are missing is that they are not only allowing Microsoft to quote, they are asking for a quote from anyone and will pick the lowest option. They are only specifing that it has to be for a Microsoft solution. As for restricting to a Microsoft product this is done on almost all RFQ's. Police departments Restric RFQ to Ford Crown vics because that is the vehicle they have a support network for. CA CHP restricted their firearms RFQ to S&W 4006 because that is the only weapon they have straind and have repair people for. (This one went thru multiple appeals from other gun vendors, in the end the state mad it case that it was unsafe to support multiple weapon platforms in training and equipment) The DOD purchases Cisco hardware and its RFQ only support Cisco hardware. This is because all the training is done on Cisco hardware and we can just re-train every time they purchase anothe grup of equipment. I deal with local govt that request a quote for a VFD, PLC, Contactors, Pilot devices and they specify the devices have to be A-B as this is what they have standardized to. This restricts it to a platform. They have people trained on a platform Microsoft, If they had to change or support multiple programs just to be fair the cost would be prohibitive. I know people hate Microsoft but it is a defacto standard in the IT industry since there are so many people trained on how to support.
I agree that the Blackberry is scarry for this as it is routed thru a foreign country. But the NSA might like this as they will be able to spy on the Pres Communications as they are routed thru the foreign country. And they already allow the military to use blackberys as they used to be the only device that was approved. They now have windows mobile devices that can meet the standard.