Comments on: Purchasing Policies That Create a Barrier to Computing Diversity http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/weblogs/pmeunier/general/post-117/one-of-the-barriers-to-computing-diversity/ Privacy, Security and Information Assurance issues Sat, 17 May 2008 00:49:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Pascal Meunier http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/weblogs/pmeunier/general/post-117/one-of-the-barriers-to-computing-diversity/#comment-111243 Pascal Meunier Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:53:50 +0000 http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/weblogs/pmeunier/general/post-117/one-of-the-barriers-to-computing-diversity/#comment-111243 thanks Steven, I agree with your points. I will change the title. Apple laptops are quite popular here, both with students and faculty, and Apple is a preferred supplier. Cheers thanks Steven, I agree with your points. I will change the title. Apple laptops are quite popular here, both with students and faculty, and Apple is a preferred supplier.
Cheers

]]> By: Steven Clark http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/weblogs/pmeunier/general/post-117/one-of-the-barriers-to-computing-diversity/#comment-110712 Steven Clark Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:06:45 +0000 http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/weblogs/pmeunier/general/post-117/one-of-the-barriers-to-computing-diversity/#comment-110712 I imagine this is done to make it far less attractive to buy outside the capture, erm, contracts that Purdue has with certain 'Preferred Suppliers'. It's not the Ubuntu that's the issue, but the contractual practices. We have similar arrangements here. We can only buy outside our 'Preferred Suppliers' if and only if they do not carry, or cannot supply, something 'similar' to what we think we want. A whole lot of compromising goes on. We have standard configuration boxes for classes of employees. CompSci academics desktops are the same config as SocSci. After all, what would we want with more hard drive space? or RAM? [We can get 'above spec' systems: but we still have to go through the 'Preferred Supplier' first.] Technically, your headline is incorrect. It gives the impression that [computer + Ubuntu] is more expensive (in some way) than [some alternative]. What you're really saying here is that because of the way 'Preferred Supplier' accounting works at Purdue, sourcing a machine from an alternate vendor is more expensive. By-the-by: What's Purdue's take on Apple? We have a decent sprinkling of them about the place. Particularly as laptops. I imagine this is done to make it far less attractive to buy outside the capture, erm, contracts that Purdue has with certain ‘Preferred Suppliers’. It’s not the Ubuntu that’s the issue, but the contractual practices.

We have similar arrangements here. We can only buy outside our ‘Preferred Suppliers’ if and only if they do not carry, or cannot supply, something ’similar’ to what we think we want. A whole lot of compromising goes on.

We have standard configuration boxes for classes of employees. CompSci academics desktops are the same config as SocSci. After all, what would we want with more hard drive space? or RAM? [We can get 'above spec' systems: but we still have to go through the 'Preferred Supplier' first.]

Technically, your headline is incorrect. It gives the impression that [computer + Ubuntu] is more expensive (in some way) than [some alternative]. What you’re really saying here is that because of the way ‘Preferred Supplier’ accounting works at Purdue, sourcing a machine from an alternate vendor is more expensive.

By-the-by: What’s Purdue’s take on Apple? We have a decent sprinkling of them about the place. Particularly as laptops.

]]> By: Chris Walsh http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/weblogs/pmeunier/general/post-117/one-of-the-barriers-to-computing-diversity/#comment-109173 Chris Walsh Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:21:22 +0000 http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/weblogs/pmeunier/general/post-117/one-of-the-barriers-to-computing-diversity/#comment-109173 Man. Those are some talented bureaucrats you have out there. We in Chicago woulds see this as an awesome business opportunity. :^) Set up a shell company which acts as a middleman for these "50% markup" buys, but is on the approved vendor list since it would be "likely (!!) to be a repeat vendor". This forces purchasers to either pay retail+50% or retail + whatever your shell company wants to tack on. Naturally, this has an upper bound of 50%, but you can vary the markup by product if you know how desperate purchasers are, thus maximizing your profit. The fact that this has not already been done suggests that getting on the approved list is a hard problem, but with a bit of out of the box thinking (read: paying somebody who is already on it a "cross-marketing consulting fee") this can be tackled. Man. Those are some talented bureaucrats you have out there.

We in Chicago woulds see this as an awesome business opportunity. :^)

Set up a shell company which acts as a middleman for these “50% markup” buys, but is on the approved vendor list since it would be “likely (!!) to be a repeat vendor”. This forces purchasers to either pay retail+50% or retail + whatever your shell company wants to tack on. Naturally, this has an upper bound of 50%, but you can vary the markup by product if you know how desperate purchasers are, thus maximizing your profit.

The fact that this has not already been done suggests that getting on the approved list is a hard problem, but with a bit of out of the box thinking (read: paying somebody who is already on it a “cross-marketing consulting fee”) this can be tackled.

]]>