Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

blogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 156 posts

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#71

Post by beerandt »

marzell wrote: post #51

JEDI aside, I feel like Azure has grown in leaps and bounds... meanwhile AWS has rested on its laurels because they were the first major cloud and so many people adopted them early and either are stuck or in denial about where Azure is at. Even Microsoft shops that would benefit from tighter integrations and quicker feature releases seem to only really consider Azure an afterthought and will use GCP for specialty cas…

Strong-arming Office 365 onto companies was also pretty brilliant, in that it forced every company/org that uses Office to at least investigate the MS ecosystem. And by a person who likely holds at least some sway over purchasing power and infrastructure decisions.

And how many companies don't use Office at all?

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#74

Post by GCSAQCMIYI »

KarlKemp wrote: post #63
koheripbal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon has put a LOT of money into DC. From setting up an HQ2 in DC to Bezos personally purchasing the largest mansion in the city to host event for political power brokers. It should be no surprise that he's pissed that that amount of investment isn't starting to pay dividends.

You are mixing up "DC the actual city" and "DC as a synonym for politics". DoD couldn't care less about Bezos' mansion or HQ2's impact on the city's economy. And running a newspaper that continuously annoys a President doesn't really fit the apparently popular idea that Bezos is spending money to get favourable treatment from politicians. Especially when that politician you're annoying is known to have a somewhat vin…

>And running a newspaper that continuously annoys a President doesn't really fit the apparently popular idea that Bezos is spending money to get favourable treatment from politicians.

At least from outward appearances, most of the ruling class and permanent government isn't particularly fond of the current President.

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#75

Post by roel_v »

wahern wrote: post #45
roel_v wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having been on the winning side of a contract once for a bid that was clearly 100% written by a competitor, the Big Dog in our industry, in such a way that they absolutely thought only they could ever be meeting the terms - and then winning that bid by offering a better product at a lower price, and faster, I can a little bit imagine how satisfying this win must have been for the Microsoft bid manager or whatever the…

> then winning that bid by offering a better product at a lower price, and faster, Did you actually deliver on time and on budget?

Just a little over time, and it was fixed budget. Timing wise still much better than the norm in our industry.

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#76

Post by [deleted] »

chucky_z wrote: post #47
toomuchtodo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Azure is less friendly as a technology practitioner (compared to working with AWS), but I fully appreciate the value you describe. Does AWS have Active Directory as a first class citizen? Office 365? Outlook/Exchange? No.

AWS does offer AD as a first class citizen... More than Azure. AzureAD is not Active Directory, and unless something has changed a lot in the last year (maybe it has?), Azure does not offer anything that looks, smells, and feels like on-prem AD in the cloud.

[deleted]

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#77

Post by GCSAQCMIYI »

KarlKemp wrote: post #63
koheripbal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon has put a LOT of money into DC. From setting up an HQ2 in DC to Bezos personally purchasing the largest mansion in the city to host event for political power brokers. It should be no surprise that he's pissed that that amount of investment isn't starting to pay dividends.

You are mixing up "DC the actual city" and "DC as a synonym for politics". DoD couldn't care less about Bezos' mansion or HQ2's impact on the city's economy. And running a newspaper that continuously annoys a President doesn't really fit the apparently popular idea that Bezos is spending money to get favourable treatment from politicians. Especially when that politician you're annoying is known to have a somewhat vin…

>DoD couldn't care less about Bezos' mansion or HQ2's impact on the city's economy.

How do you know that?

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#78

Post by chadcmulligan »

GCSAQCMIYI wrote: post #73
smitty1e wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth not mentioning.

Do you think he bought it because he really likes journalism?

Here's an interview with him here about it [1]

It seems he had a mix of reasons, he says. No doubt now that it's a functioning entity he has an added bonus. I remember at the time though most people thought he was throwing good money after bad.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephaniedenning/2018/09/19/why...

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#79

Post by [deleted] »

ceejayoz wrote: post #61
beerandt wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>barred from answering questions on the subject during interviews

There's such a thing as a written interview. There's no indication they answered the questions in a written form; it appears quite clear the White House asserted privilege, which would apply to any form of questioning.

[deleted]

Re: It bid high and lost. Should Amazon be allowed a do-over on JEDI?

#80

Post by chadcmulligan »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #70
smitty1e wrote: post #53

No. The government should have multiple cloud providers.

No. They should run almost everything in-house so it can be properly integrated.

Isn't the usual business of government to rotate every 5-10 years?

- In house is the way to go!

- No the pervious administration was wrong - outsourcing is the way to go

Lather, rinse, repeat

Post reply on HN