3 ms·
> their reasoning was: Microsoft and Google are Billion dollar companies. Did you ever see that written down. Or was it an assumption or rumour? I ask becaus
by nonrandomstring 3y ago
> their reasoning was: Microsoft and Google are Billion dollar companies.
Did you ever see that written down. Or was it an assumption or rumour?
I ask because I specifically advise against that thinking and debunk
the "big company = trustworthy" fallacy. But what I find is that
actually there is appropriate low trust of US big-tech amongst the C
level, but they are compelled to use Microsoft or whatever for
non-technical/non-security reasons.
- AvocadoPanic 3y agoThe list of 'approved' software vendors doesn't say it's because their billion dollar companies, but if it's from a company on the list that's enough. No further vetting required.
- nonrandomstring 3y agoYes indeed. I think where this goes wrong is when Bob in purchasing confuses can use this approved supplier with must use this supplier and fails to notice said supplier about to be bankrupted in court over a multi-billion security scandal, and goes ahead anyway. Voila! We just bought a couple million IoT bricks and doorstops that will be in a landfill next week.
- Natsu 3y agoIt very much feels like a "no one ever got fired for buying IBM" type of scenario sometimes.
- ecshafer 3y agoIn this case, a financial company, yes the reasoning written down on the intranet was that they had the backing of billion dollar companies.