A bill before Parliament would require all of government to use only

I dont think the question is complete as Software company response is not shown and question says
which of the following...made in one or the other of the two passage....

--
This is the correct answer. They all undermine. The first one undermines the software company (paragraph 1). The second one undermines the software company (paragraph 2). The third one undermines the government (paragraph 2).

SN: I'm annoyed that I just bought these practice exams, they include questions from years ago (as per this thread), and they don't provide explanations for the correct answers.

Anyone have any idea why the answer to B is does not undermine?

The last sentence in the software company's argument states that the bill’s measures are likely to increase compatibility problems between the information-technology systems of government agencies, as well as between government systems and private-sector systems.

I had this question just now as well, but it's not on the OP?

For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement is made by the software company and disputed by the government in its response. Otherwise, select No.

Yes No Open-source software is not always free from purchase costs.
Yes No Government decisions concerning choice of a software system should be based primarily on economizing and cost.
Yes No It is not the primary aim of the bill to protect citizens’ free access to information.

Statement 1: Migration from proprietary software to open-source software would be significantly more expensive for the government than would migration from proprietary software to other proprietary software.

Undermines the government's argument. The government argues that the bill would make software migration easier and less expensive in the long run. However, if statement 1 is true, then the opposite would be the case. Migration from proprietary software to open-source software would be significantly more expensive than migration from proprietary software to other proprietary software, which would make the bill more expensive in the long run.

Statement 2: The measures included in the bill will, if complied with, ensure compatibility among software systems used by all the various relevant stakeholders.

Does not undermine either argument. The company's argument is that the bill would increase compatibility problems, while the government's argument is that the bill would decrease compatibility problems. Statement 2 does not address either of these arguments directly, so it does not undermine either one.

Statement 3: As a software package is used for a longer period of time, it becomes less expensive to migrate from that package to another.

Undermines the company's argument. The company argues that the cost of open-source software is much higher than the cost of proprietary software, and that this would make migration to open-source software more expensive. However, if statement 3 is true, then the opposite would be the case. As software packages are used for longer periods of time, they become more complex and interconnected, which would make migration from them more difficult and expensive.

Question 2 is wrong, correct answer is: There is proprietary software that can be affordably implemented by the government and that would fully guarantee free access to information by citizens.

"And although savings are indeed mentioned in the bill, its primary aim is to protect citizens’ free access to information"

I agree with vnavaes ... I think the correct answer to question two is E) "There is proprietary software that can be affordably implemented by the government and that would fully guarantee free access to information by citizens.".
The primary goal of the bill is free access to information by citizens, as stated here: "...And although savings are indeed mentioned in the bill, its primary aim is to protect citizens’ free access to information.... ". And E) does this by directly countering the government's claim that open-source software is necessary for free access to information. If proprietary software can also guarantee this access, it questions the need for a law mandating only open-source software.
Can someone confirm this? bb Bunuel

I agree. I don’t see how answers see with compatibility undermines the bill suggesting open source software. Also including chetan2u

Posted from my mobile device

In view of the motivation for the bill as presented in the government response, which one of the following would, if true, most strongly support a case against the need for the law proposed in the bill?
The question statement tells us that we have to stick to the reasoning given by the government in favour of the bill. There are two cases made for the enactment of the bill, and both have been touched by two options given.
Thus, let us discard all other and look at these two options.

1. The government response
“ The bill would indeed require government to begin an intensive process of software migration that would not otherwise be undertaken. However, the high cost of software migration in general is an argument in favor of the bill. “
Now, if there is a software available that could do the same work at lower cost, the migration is not required.
However, the last statement in the governments response undermines this option as the cost of shifting to this propriety software would also involve similar expenditure.
And of course, migration from proprietary to open- source software would entail no greater cost than would migration between two different proprietary software systems.

2. The government response:
“Because the bill requires that encoding of data not be tied to a single software provider, it is able to guarantee this free access.”
The law basically is against single provider, that is proprietary software, because it does not allow free flow of information to users.
But this proprietary software is affordable (that is cost involved is affordable) and the word ‘implemented’ should mean it meets the requirements of government. Finally, it allows free flow of information.
So, should be the answer.

­

chetan2u,
I have the following two doubts that still make me think that the first of the above two options is the right answer:

(1) Your explanation for rejecting option 1:
The question stem has the crucial words "if true". Doesn't that mean we should take whatever is stated in the answer as true, even if it opposes something in the passage? In that case, proprietary software DOES have a lower total cost.

(2) Answer option 2 has the words "can be affordably implemented". But the criterion for selection is NOT about affordability - it's about higher vs. lower total cost (even though both are affordabe).

Please help me understand what I'm missing.­

The above clearly states that the primary aim is to give free access to the citizens. The option 2 which we discussed above is the one talking of free access. So, if there is a proprietary software doing the same task within affordable rates, then why move to open-source, that why is there a need for the law.

However, the option one talks of affordability but not free access, which is the primary aim.­­

­
OK thanks chetan2u , now I'm convinced!
I'm paraphrasing what you said here (for my own clarity):
1. According to the government response, the motivation for the bill is its primary aim, which is free access to citizens.
2. The need for the bill would go away if the primary aim could be met without the use of open-source software, i.e., with proprietary software.
    (because the the bill requires the government to "use ONLY open-source software").
3. The correct answer tells us that there IS some proprietary software available that meets the primary aim. So the need for the bill goes away.­

Totally with you. ­

­KarishmaB Bunuel GMATCoachBen ChiranjeevSingh can you please explain all the questions including the following question. Additionally, please explain the second para of govt response. it is not at all clear , which "different system" are they referring to (is it proprietory or open source or both) and if they think migration is expensive from one to another, then how is it cheap for open source or from proprietory to open source?

Q1 - all

Q2 Why not B and why is the correct answer right?

Q3 For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement is made by the software company and disputed by the government in its response. Otherwise, select No.

a)  Open-source software is not always free from purchase costs.
b)Government decisions concerning choice of a software system should be based primarily on economizing and cost.
C) It is not the primary aim of the bill to protect citizens’ free access to information.

Ps: Also note that the OA posted for both questions question is wrong­­­­

Please post screen shot and the correct OA, so that it can be changed.­

In the first question , the answer to all 3 is undermine. That is the official answer