I'm presuming this post comparing the "war cloud" bidding conflict to a shounen anime is in fact bait
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Amazon will challenge Pentagon’s award of $10 billion JEDI contract to Microsoft, ‘unmistakable bias’ as one of its concerns in the award
- Thread starter Deleted member 3812
- Start date
I'm presuming this post comparing the "war cloud" bidding conflict to a shounen anime is in fact bait
1. I feel like you're missing the point of "power levels". They're a simplification.
2. What are you going on about exclusives or OS features? Are you comparing consoles or AWS/Azure? It feels like i'm talking to an xbox fan who's not happy their console is less powerful.
Azure's biggest advantage, to be clear, is the fact that Microsoft already has contracts in place with big corps because they are overwhelmingly Windows shops. This makes it significantly quicker for the IT team to deploy on Azure (they don't have to wait 6-12 months for legal department to do new paperwork for a new provider). I have seen this countless times. It's not a technical advantage and it is moot for this project for obvious reasons I hope I don't have to spell out...
Want sources? Ok! Gartner agrees with me :
And if that weren't enough, the OP itself, which I hope you took the time to read, very clearly states:
"Amazon is also the only company to hold the Defense Department's highest-level security certification, called Impact Level 6. Microsoft made strides during the year-long period the award was tied up in litigation, finalizing a number of partnerships that analysts say may have narrowed the gap."
See where it says gap ? That gap is in favor of AWS, not Azure.
An embarrassing post would have been me saying Ali Baba Cloud is better than AWS/Azure/GC.
Now stop giving Trump the benefit of the doubt! He is ...the fucking worst. This is only one of many illegal/petty things he's done.
I was extending your video game console analogy, did you forget what you wrote? I don't understand what you're complaining about.
Notice where I spelled out "A project like this carries a complex set of functional and non functional requirements"? Being able to deploy more quickly would be a non functional requirement. It's not all tech specs. This is exactly what I'm arguing.
Want sources? Ok! Gartner agrees with me :
And if that weren't enough, the OP itself, which I hope you took the time to read, very clearly states:
"Amazon is also the only company to hold the Defense Department's highest-level security certification, called Impact Level 6. Microsoft made strides during the year-long period the award was tied up in litigation, finalizing a number of partnerships that analysts say may have narrowed the gap."
See where it says gap ? That gap is in favor of AWS, not Azure.
An embarrassing post would have been me saying Ali Baba Cloud is better than AWS/Azure/GC.
Now stop giving Trump the benefit of the doubt! He is ...the fucking worst. This is only one of many illegal/petty things he's done.
I've worked for multiple companies that have dominated the top right of their respective gartner quadrant, and even in those places it was considered a complete joke. At one of the companies the engineers had an agreement that as soon as "magic quadrant" was mentioned in a business wide meeting, they would literally stand up and leave because that meant that we were going into the sales and marketing bullshit portion, and there was no longer any relevant information to be had.
My dude, I am not defending the vile racist president. I'm trying to add more context about how projects like this work. Give me a break.
They most certainly did. To be fair, that's how contracts like this usually work unfortunately.
Last edited:
Since when does rules matter? The entire administration and party have proven in plenty of cases that they will break and ignore rules, and nobody will bring them into accountability.
All of you comparing AWS and Azure in a vacuum are, unfortunately, wrong. And it's mostly a waste of effort.
The point is to evaluate (according to the terms of the solicitation) how the proposals meet the government's requirements, as defined by the solicitation.
Moreover, of course DoD was expecting (more) litigation before GAO and COFC and has prepared for it more than extensively.
The point is to evaluate (according to the terms of the solicitation) how the proposals meet the government's requirements, as defined by the solicitation.
Moreover, of course DoD was expecting (more) litigation before GAO and COFC and has prepared for it more than extensively.
Right, AWS vs Azure as platforms are not relevant at all here. Most people know AWS is better. Microsoft still has a tremendous "home-field advantage" here as they already host a significant amount of DOD services. The fact that Microsoft could do this without some huge migration project or messy cross site authentication scheme alone makes them the clear choice. I say this as someone who has contracted for DoD a long time.
Last edited:
While i absolutely get the sentiment and it could 't thankfully happen to a worse guy, the idea that the leader of the free world can throw a temper tantrum on twitter saying he hates amazon because he hates their news division and that he's not going to let another branch of the government give em a contract is totalitarian as fuck and there needs to be some blowback (which, lets be honest there wont be because this list number 1,372 of crazy shit he did this YEAR that should be a huge political scandal but wont be because we've got no spine as the american people)
What? That makes no sense. Then you're saying it's fair game to influence the system and allow people with an axe to grind to poison the well. That is on the level of the GOP's nonsense defense on impeachment.
I've been placing clients into AWS before Govcloud was a thing, I know. Microsoft being the most logical solution has nothing to do with AWS being inferior or anything like that. I've said multiple times now that I think AWS is a better service. It just makes far more sense to go with the company who is already hosting all of your domains and email systems.
Not that Amazon is an innocent player themselves, but if reports are true that Trump told Mattis to "Screw Amazon" on the contract, they have a case, especially given that he has often tied Amazon to WaPo content critical of him. Even if that didn't end up actually factoring in, the fact he even said it casts doubt on the whole process.
Next month imagine paying twice as much to Oracle for cloud services
Amazon has a government version of AWS that's used by many government arms and defense contractors.
For those that don't know, AWS has like 60% of the public sector cloud business. AWS is quite ingratiated in the government's cloud efforts. The amount of lift and shift that would be required for programs that run on AWS will be massive. The contract structure wasn't well thought out, the winner isn't even the most capable, and you have a president that's openly commented on this contract due to his own biases. You can hate Amazon and still see the issues here
AWS only supports auxiliary services for the US DoD. Everything foundational is hosted by Microsoft already.
Its 1000% true. As someone who helped migrate the Air Force and Army into the centralized Microsoft solution in place now, I know exactly how much of a massive clusterfuck it is to migrate their main services anywhere. A move to AWS would add years to this project. Unless Amazon was coming in at a huge discount, it makes absolutely no sense to migrate again.
AWS is a fantastic service, they are just not the best fit here.
For sure, this would be an interesting case and can set a standard for cases like this.
Thanks for the insight.
Yep, agreed. I haven't looked at the JEDI RFP, and although I could ask some colleagues about it or check FBO (I'm actually a DoD procurement lawyer...) for clarification, I'd expect that corporate experience was an evaluation factor, as well as interoperability capabilities.
Gotta imagine this is contained to NIPRnet too, considering AWS fuels the Intelligence Community's Cloud Services platform.
