3 ms·
If the accusations are correct then I would say that the Oracle part is irrelevant, were the public money spent legally?
by simion314 7y ago
If the accusations are correct then I would say that the Oracle part is irrelevant, were the public money spent legally?
- Someone1234 7y agoOracle's argument is that it shouldn't be delivered as a single contract and should be split among multiple cloud vendors. Anyone whose used AWS/Azure/Oracle Cloud will tell you why that idea is problematic. Particularly when dealing with a hardened government version of these cloud environments. The only potential corruption their complaint indicates is the hiring of a decision maker at the DoD. It is a bad look. I'd need to see the timeline/understand more about it to form an opinion.
- simion314 7y agoI did not read the full complaint, but it is possible that something fishy happened there even if Oracle has it's own interests. Having more then 1 company that provides the service could help preventing vendor locking and provide better proces c in future.