City changes computer system – again
The city, which migrated its operations onto Google in 2019, is migrating back to Microsoft and while there’s a lot of blither here, I’d love to know the actual reason why. It can’t simply be an irregularity in the contract from the company that bid to get the support job on Google, and the thing about everyone else using Microsoft and not being able to open Excel or Word files in Google’s online apps is plain and simple bullshit. Somebody stands to gain big from this shift and they’ve sold a bill of goods to the city.
Blork 18:44 on 2022-09-30 Permalink
I recall I was against the move to Google back then, as it seemed like trend-following with no eye on consequences. Google is far more evil than Microsoft. They exist only to lure you in with free stuff then scrape your data and enrich their profiles database. I can’t see why their enterprise systems would be any different.
I personally hate using Google docs and spreadsheets. I hate the way files are handled (e.g., sometimes you look at a Google doc and it ends up embedded in your personal Google account, but why? How?). And even if you can open and work on MS files in Google, going back and forth a few times can complete wreck the underlying structure, so imagine hundreds of people doing that every day with vendors and other third parties.
I am no fan of MS, but comparing the use – in particular in an enterprise environment – of Word or Excel with the Google versions is like comparing a new iPhone with a 10-year-old off-brand Android phone. MS Teams vs. Google Meet is like comparing a Tesla with a Lada. (True: I’m vetting some vendors for a service buy at work right now and the lowest-ranking candidate so far is the one that insists on meeting via Google Meet – and that’s part of the reason they’re lowest ranked.)
So if you ask me, they’re making the right move.
dhomas 21:00 on 2022-09-30 Permalink
At least they’re only paying for one of them. I know for a fact that other public organizations (ex: the EMSB) are paying for both Google and Microsoft services. There is a complete duplication of services. You can save your files to Google Drive or OneDrive, Google Docs or Office 365. It’s completely ridiculous.
That said, there is a lot of weirdness in that story. I know from experience that price stability is not given with Google. My Google Workspace price has increased without me being able to do much about it without a costly migration. They bank on lock-in to squeeze more out of their customers. Google also employs a shady “high watermark” pricing model. If you pay 10$ per user per month and you have 200 users, it costs 2000$. If you reduce your number of users to 100, you would expect to pay 1000$. Nope! You can never decrease your fee; you always pay for the highest amount of users ever registered on the platform. I’m not sure if Microsoft works the same way. The thing about opening word documents is a load of shit, I agree. But the data privacy issue is especially strange. First off, we are not in the EU where GDPR is a thing. But even if it were a requirement to store data locally, Google offers datacenters in Montreal and Toronto. Microsoft has datacenters in Quebec city and Toronto. Both offer the option for Data Regions. Plus, there are no cost savings. Google’s service would have cost between 73 and 105 million (I assume the unpredictable cost is due to unknown price increases). Microsoft’s will cost 121 million. This may or may not include migration costs, which are not negligible and prone to ballooning. My verdict as a seasoned “IT Guy”: someone’s getting a big commission/payoff. It reminds me of how Microsoft won back the public sector in Munich some years ago (by promising to move their German headquarters to Munich).
walkerp 21:15 on 2022-09-30 Permalink
The backend of MS is a freaking nightmare compared to Google. That will only matter to the poor souls who have to administer it, though given that it is government it is possible there is a core of old school Active Directory experts who are very happy right now.
But dear gods the poor staff will have to start using MS Teams! That is going to hurt.
walkerp 21:22 on 2022-09-30 Permalink
I just read the article and I don’t think there is any big scam at the municipal level. The major factor here is compatibility with the provincial system. Now it is entirely probably that there are some kickbacks and pork going on with the contract at the provincial level that just got fatter, but it seems pretty apparent that what the mayor says is the truth. Now that both levels of government have been forced to go way more digital, it makes sense for them to be on the same systems. Probably can share support contracts, even backend infrastructure.
I think that was always the goal and then they probably came up with justifications, probably true about the costs going up as Dhomas notes which they say was in contravention of the contract, but utter bullshit (as Dhomas also notes) about the server location. We really are using the SPVM to vet our city’s digital security criteria, that’s a laugher.
Kevin 21:40 on 2022-09-30 Permalink
Having gone through similar transfers with proprietary tools in the past, I know that the people making decisions are not the ones actually using the products, and that the deciders frequently completely misunderstand what is being said/promised/feasible/required for said software.
This sounds like a whole bunch of power MS users have spent 4 years screaming that Google doesn’t work the way they need it to.
dhomas 07:38 on 2022-10-01 Permalink
Disclaimer: I work in IT, so I have a lot to say on this topic.
As walkerp mentioned, Microsoft’s backend is a disaster. Since there is so much legacy tech that’s been forcibly put online, it’s just a mess. Everything just feels “heavy”. You need a Teams client installed to get the most functionality out of it (like screen sharing). Same for Office. Teams file sharing is really just a paint job over SharePoint, instead of using the more modern OneDrive. Sharing files is a nightmarish experience. It’s difficult to share with other MS users (from other organizations) let alone someone using a non-Microsoft account. But I think this might be where the city wants to standardize. To share files, it is much easier to do so if everyone is on the same system. For work, I need to maintain a Google account and a Microsoft account associated to the same email address to be able to send and receive files across multiple organizations. It’s easy for me, but I suspect it might not be for someone less tech savvy.
Google’s system, on the other hand, seems much more streamlined. Everything runs in-browser, no need to install anything. If you’ve never used MS Office before, Google Docs/Sheets/Slides are much more intuitive, not to mention a LOT easier to collaborate on. And compatibility has come a long way with MS Office, compared to what it was just a few years ago. There’s still the occasional formatting issue, but I get that on Office now too (a custom font won’t print from Word Online, I need to download it to open it in local Word to do so. Why?).
My main issue with Google, other than the data mining, is that I don’t really own anything and lose control (to Google) over all my data. MS is pushing hard for cloud- and subscription-based everything, but still allows for on-premise installations where your data/files are yours and on your systems.
Kate 08:25 on 2022-10-01 Permalink
dhomas, if you have documents in Google, you can always download them as familiar formats, .doc or .xlsx or .csv or whatever. So it’s not as if you’re stuck. I’ve been in situations where I’ve had to migrate a document among Google, Microsoft and an Apple app like Pages or Numbers, and haven’t dropped a thing.
Joey 09:46 on 2022-10-01 Permalink
@Dhomas I would imagine that most city employees were weaned on MS Office…
Anyway, while you can certainly open an MS file in the equivalent Google app and vice versa, don’t expect all the functionalities to carry over. You won’t get far trying to work with a mildly complex Excel file in Google Sheets without having to abandon certain elements or spend time on Reddit looking for hacks.
dhomas 11:38 on 2022-10-01 Permalink
@Joey agreed. I have to use both Excel and Sheets. And some complex formulas don’t carry over. Google has gotten pretty good at fixing most of these incompatibilities (Pivot Tables used to not work, for example). Then again, I also had to upgrade an Excel version to be able to use XLOOKUP; a paid O365 version could use it, whereas a “basic” account could not. So there are compatibility issues even within Microsoft’s own ecosystem. You don’t really get this with Google as it’s pretty much a “one-size-fits-all” solution, with no differing versions for different customers.
@Kate: yes, downloading and sending files is definitely possible. But it’s a bit of a workaround when the default (for workflow or security purposes) might be to share a link to a document via Google Drive or O365. By the time the recipient receives it, tries to open it and fails, you’ve wasted time that can add up. In my case, since I work with European customers, this can mean wasting a full day to get a response. Productivity can definitely take a hit.
Kate 11:46 on 2022-10-01 Permalink
OK, granted everybody.
I really dislike the name Office 365. It’s like you’re supposed to be working every day of the year.
Ephraim 14:34 on 2022-10-02 Permalink
BTW, if anyone is looking for MS Office at a discount (legal) see https://stacksocial.com/sales/microsoft-office-professional-plus-2021-for-windows (no, I don’t get affiliate money, it’s just a damn good deal) but it is for 2021… not 365.