There's a war going on for the future CPU cycles of the US Central Intelligence Agency, and behind closed doors and under fluorescent lights, representatives of IBM and Amazon are spitting blood at each other as they vie for the contract. In a heavily redacted report made public on Tuesday, new details came to light as to why …
While your'e at it, IBM
maybe you should explain why Queensland has banned you from any future state contracts.
"successful transformational products' yeah, successful at transferring government money into IBM's maul.
Hmm... this success makes me hungy!
I'm sure the phones are ringing off the hooks in representative's offices and fat bills are being generated (then put under IBM's "contract-generating expenses") in excellent restaurants of Washington D.C.
For a company that has redefined the cloud industry through the public pricing of storage and compute, paired with voluminous public FAQ documents, to complain about this transparency advantaging competitors is a bit wrong-headed, we suggest.
Surely not as this is a "private bid", quite probably lathered with peculiarly-priced special sauce, bespoke developments, some judiciously placed cut corners and maybe a rebate or two on some items to get the market. Now IBM can re-evaluate its bid and rejiggle stuff, make more promises on X and Y, suddenly find that "prices unexpectedly can be corrected in favour of the customer" etc. and likely will reduce the overall IBM discount (which they can apply because of the IBM name, natch) The fact that they are changing to "softlayers" (whatever that is) says as much.
Alien Concepts for Earthly Futures Consideration and Derivative Consolidation
If you think and/or would be starting to suspect and fear that the American dream is for the few and not the many, and more fascist conspiring and inspired nightmare than aspiring and sharing collective constitutional meritocracy and/or benign and benevolent autocracy/business, does IBM, by the below cited historical account, have vast and deep experience in ITs murky fields, but that was a doubtful success for them in a time long gone when secrets, both good and bad, creative and destructive and disruptive, were not able to shared in an instant with everybody everywhere to inform one and all of future global plans ......... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edwin-black/ibm-holocaust_b_1301691.html
And it does appear that DODgy MODified systems have to have constant wars to supply with a steady stream of men and machines to build for searching enemy and destroy missions, although that was then and this is now and things can be changed almost instantly by novel controllers with new memes brought into wwwork, REST and PayPlay , and with Virtually Remote Autonomous Command and Anonymous Control of Computers and Communications in Clouds and CyberSpaces, is the Great Game Paradigm somewhat radically and fundamentally changed with considerably smarter drivers operating systems into sharing exclusive knowledge to benefit executive administrations into Global Operating Devices Man Management with Foreign and Alien Assets Distribution Offices, albeit now fully securely virtualised with no physical infrastructure form to rephorm with phishing and kinetic attack threat/brute force assault ....... which be the dumb route and present root of past dictatorships/past root of present dictatorships and is always a self-destructive meme and shared journey to macro-float and micromanage/pump and dump/pimp and finance.
Ps If you think the Huffington Post is more rag and sad lads' mag than deep and intelligent portal for learning, may that story pimped and pumped be classic sub-prime and just fit for dumping. However, if true ....... well, ....... can a leopard change its spots and rewrite history?
"what Big Blue felt was an unfair bidding process"
And boy do IBM know a few things about unfair bidding processes.
As others have said there's the public prices for COTS stuff and there's the special prices for government "totally unique" requirements, bespoke tweaks, contractor staff on site (security cleared naturally) and all those other things which, very regrettably, will push up their
Should have done what NSA did with ERA, essentially privatizing their in house IT team as a computer mfg.
CIA Cloud Tender
Surely the process should be a 're-evaluation' of tender responses already received, and NOT an opportunity for the participating parties to 'Re-Tender'... Amazon have a valid point, to enable a competitor to CHANGE their proposal, AFTER having access to the competitive bids, surely is a questionable practice... 'Ok Guys, here's what your competitor proposed... go back to the drawing board and conjure up something better'. Wow... talk about 'unfair business practice' !
Re: CIA Cloud Tender
All sides get to look at the submitted bids. All sides get to resubmit with changes. All side that made the initial cut that is, meaning you can't submit if you were not in the original bid.
Amazon might have a point had the findings not been upheld as "unfair".
I feel so much safer
knowing our state secrets will be held securely by a corporation rather than the government.
Pots & Kettles arguing over respective blackness
Is this the same Amazon whose might cloud failed recently?
- On the matter of shooting down Amazon delivery drones with shotguns
- Review Bring Your Own Disks: The Synology DS214 network storage box
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- IT MELTDOWN ruins Cyber Monday for RBS, Natwest customers
- Google's new cloud CRUSHES Amazon in RAM battle