IBM has been temporarily barred from bidding for new contracts with US Federal government agencies. The company blames the suspension on a dispute with the Environmental Protection Agency - of which it had no knowledge, until it read about the ban on a government website. The US Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of …
OK, being blackballed by the US government is like being blindsided by a stampede of elephants in a desert, at high noon. So one of two things happened: Someone at Big Blue made a stinky of gargantuan proportion or someone in the US government screwed the pooch. My money's on the latter, as for the past 20 or so years, I've essentially lost any remaining faith in my government. Idiots & thieves, and there's no cure for stupid. And federal law strictly prohibits private citizens from beating thieves within an inch of their sorry lives.
I chose Paris because even she knows IBM isn't that inept.
Some poor jamoke wearing something like a cap with an IBM logo on it made some comment about the idiocy or incompetence of the EPA, and as bad luck would have it, he was within earshot of the EPA's chief of absurdity*. The rest is, as they say, history.
*The Absurdity Chief is the number two position in every U.S. gubermint agency
Seriously though, it's not like its just IBM losing -- so is the government, with inferior* products.
Sounds like someone at DoJ screwed the pooch too...
OK, they're prohibited form making fresh tenders under this notice, and it's a federal notice to boot.
30 days to appear such a prohibition is fine and dandy, but if you're NOT told you're under the hammer, you're royally screwed. IBM were damned lucky someone else spotted it, and told them.
So, the questions now become:
1. Why did the Feds not tell Big Blue that they were under a prohibition to tender?
2. Who profits from IBMs prohibition?
Answers on a postcard?
Bill Gates with horns 'cause it's rude not to ;)
Why do people ....
Still believe controversial sories published on 1st of ARIL ?
Re: Why do people ...
Except it was published on March 31st and references an (apparently) IBM document published early morning on the 31st. If it is an AF joke then the joke's on them.
Paris, Paris, Who the F**K is Paris
no, you don't get it bws... it's all about mainframes.
it's the other way around. IBM *owns* the US gov. And every other major corporation. All they need to do is threaten to withdraw mainframe software licenses. If you own their mainframe, you own the entity - from US gov. on down...
IBM is punished before the verdict is passed. Is it what justice meant?
I've had to deal with IBM crap. Way to go, gov't! Maybe this will force IBM to step up on the quality control and customer service.
It wasn't me, Guv, it was the chips which did it.
"it's the other way around. IBM *owns* the US gov. And every other major corporation. All they need to do is threaten to withdraw mainframe software licenses. If you own their mainframe, you own the entity - from US gov. on down..." ..... By corestore Posted Tuesday 1st April 2008 13:33 GMT
You're 'avin' a larf, mate ......... for that would have GWB with a stay out of jail free card and IBM in the dock charged with ......well, let's not get bitchy and just settle for Gross Incompetence in the Face of Stiff Non-Competition aka Suffering from a Lack of Viable Intelligence in a Surfeit of Incredible Bewilderment.
They could always plead Diminished Responsibility by Reason of Insanity, which is bound to Win Win for who would argue against IT.
Fascism @ work
Some crony in the bush regime must have discovered that IBM has too many Democrats on their payroll.
"....All they need to do is threaten to withdraw mainframe software licenses....." You are sadly mistaken. Being in bed with the government (in fact, either side of the Atlantic, believe it or not) means they can royally scr*w you as and when they wish! A potential issue for IBM is that if the US Government decides those same mainframes are providing an essential service, they can insist IBM continues to provide support for that service long after the date IBM would normally stop support to ordinary customers.
A simple example of this was the Y2K shenanigans - all three major UNIX vendors were licking their lips at the thought of all the non-Y2K-compliant kit they thought the US and UK govs would have to replace, only to be told that they would have to shut-up and sort out workarounds and continued support for as long as the govs desired. There are still plenty of government non-Y2K-compliant and supposedly "unsupported" servers and mainframes chugging away!
My bet is someone at the EPA is looking to build a name for themselves at IBM's expense.
Um no, more likely some in IBM said something about a high rank gov official , and now this is pay back.
Nah, something doesn't smell right here...
I don't know... the close proximity to April Fools makes me wonder, but in all candor, either way, it just doesn't pass the smell test. Big government makes for even bigger business... It would be my relatively uneducated guess that a high ranking member of some US Federal Government "Blue Ribbon Panel" or "Industry Adviser" to some investigating committee, either in the EPA, GAO or DHS, and also just happens to be either a CEO, COO or CFO of one of IBM's competition.
And IF this is true, it's just a passive/aggressive exhibition of the abuse of power and/or competitive "shot across the bow".
While I'm not that high in the food chain, I do work for IBM's competition, and I certainly wouldn't put it past any of the greedy fuckers at our helm.
As a matter of fact, of the few in the "black palace" I've ever met face to face, I am convinced that every damn one of them would sell their dying child's organs in the name of "shareholder equity" and unofficially, the executive stock performance bonus of a 2 or 3X salary bonus... Kids are cheap, compared to personal net worth.