Newham having second thoughts about Microsoft

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 19, 2008.

  1. I remember a big discussion about this in nz.comp a few years ago, when the
    London borough of Newham was considering embracing Open Source, until a
    cut-rate deal by Microsoft saw it change its mind.

    Well, guess what
    <http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/04/18/microsoft-flagship-flounders>:
    things haven't been going so well with that decision to go Microsoft:

    The deal would involve a technology refresh after four years, but
    Computer Weekly revealed in September that the refresh had been delayed.

    Another of the key reasons why the council chose Microsoft over open
    source in 2004 was that it saw the vendor as a safe option.

    It wanted to ensure that, "effective working with external partners is
    not compromised by incompatibility of office systems."

    The refresh, said Weakly was delayed because Vista, Microsoft's latest
    operating system, would not be compatible with other software used by
    the council.

    The "safe" option wasn't so safe after all...
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 19, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Gordon Guest

    On 2008-04-19, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:
    > I remember a big discussion about this in nz.comp a few years ago, when the
    > London borough of Newham was considering embracing Open Source, until a
    > cut-rate deal by Microsoft saw it change its mind.
    >

    There is a time to switch horses. Just takes some people longer to know
    when.
    Gordon, Apr 20, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>, thingy <> wrote:
    >Gordon wrote:
    >> On 2008-04-19, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:
    >>> I remember a big discussion about this in nz.comp a few years ago, when the
    >>> London borough of Newham was considering embracing Open Source, until a
    >>> cut-rate deal by Microsoft saw it change its mind.
    >>>

    >> There is a time to switch horses. Just takes some people longer to know
    >> when.

    >
    >Hmm, if a vendor promises something then it is not un-reasonable to
    >expect that to happen.........


    ... *Except* if their terms of use say something like ...
    we promise to deliver nothing. You promise to pay us whenever we say so.

    Sounds like MS, and most telecommunications companies to me. :)
    Bruce Sinclair, Apr 22, 2008
    #3
  4. In article <>, thingy <> wrote:
    (snip)
    >>> Hmm, if a vendor promises something then it is not un-reasonable to
    >>> expect that to happen.........

    >>
    >> .. *Except* if their terms of use say something like ...
    >> we promise to deliver nothing. You promise to pay us whenever we say so.
    >>
    >> Sounds like MS, and most telecommunications companies to me. :)

    >
    >lol, yep....but then the council has re-defined the terms....and the PR
    >fallout is noticeable....bet it makes other councils etc think twice
    >when they see what Newham had decided to do....If I was a CIO of another
    >council I'd be round to Newham to get the info to make sure MS couldn't
    >wriggle out....


    Measureable and enforceable service levels are long over due I reckon. Only
    when custonmers demand them in large numbers will this change. :)
    Bruce Sinclair, Apr 22, 2008
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. KiwiBJ
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    485
    KiwiBJ
    Apr 24, 2006
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,355
  3. loyola
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,567
    Cerebrus
    Nov 14, 2006
  4. ztlman
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    532
    ztlman
    Mar 28, 2008
  5. KiwiBJ
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    423
    KiwiBJ
    Apr 24, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page