Now I know that Microsoft watches the world's tech press. I also know they pay many people to respond to articles such as this. Many of those people have responded here, and to me personally.

So I will ask them outright "Do you think this is justified given the status of the world's economy with the recession and all, you may have noticed?"

I can predict many of the following comments, freetard, tin-foil hat, communist, enemy of humanity (ok that last one was just made up) but I think you get my point.

If IBM are a recipient of this handout, the Microsofties would smell blood and would want to know why (valid point, IBM and offshoring?). If Microsoft, as it seems here, are the beneficiary of a government handout (Gates probably has more money in his sock draw) then questions need to be asked, but they won't be.

If you depend on Microsoft in any way (most of the computer and information technology business), you will disagree with everything said above. This is to be expected.

Is that my coat?

...is a bridge to IT frustration.

I think you are all missing something.

Has anyone seen a full copy of the rules that define how you get to the Microsoft side of the bridge?

Will they allow Richard Stallman to cross it without them insisting on a RAND toll?

If you pass in both directions will you need a different car for each way?

Has the ISO been told to make this bridge a standard?

planting trees on a bridge? WTF? they're going to plant trees that grow on a bridge that has limited depth which will eventually mean that the trees roots will destroy the bridge. I think the design needs a rethink (if the picture provided is anything to go on).

They'd be well within their rights to deny access to other users; at least this way the public gets some benefit from it- for a relatively small investment. Plus it'll (briefly) help stimulate parts of the construction industry and its suppliers- saving jobs and bringing in taxes- and make Microsoft's workflow that little bit more efficient (and God knows they need it!), meaning a slightly lower chance of layoffs and so more taxes paid.

Even better, with the recession the various construction firms won't be price-gouging as badly as they could so that they can stay competitive. So the $11M will go further than it would have a year ago.

To put it in perspective, $11M is about 4 or 5 hours worth of the funding the UK gov't gives annually to databases that generally don't work and that no-one wants.

Will the car get ejected over the side?

It's always bad drivers that cause most of the problems...

Yes, Microsoft gets a Bridge from our tax dollars. and yes, it sucks. But not as much as letting the country go tits-up. Municipalities were given guidelines to SPEND this money put forth. And they were asked to spend it post haste to counter-act the rash of recent layoffs.

Yes, MS gets a bridge, but 400 people get food on there table, mortgage payments, and little jimmy gets new sneakers. Its NOT a permanent solution. Its is a short term band aid to create a bridge (no pun intended) to cross the economic downturn.

Everybody will get a little piece of this pie. And the "Bridge to nowhere" was a project receiving exponential funds during an economic UP turn. (Slightly different situation) So people really need to step back and put everything in play before getting all crazy. This project is actually perfect. It can start tomorrow if they wanted to, its benefits the general public and a long standing employer, improves traffic flow (also commerce related).

Just watch out for in two years when they need to upgrade the bridge to a prettier less functional version, thats all.

This bridge is going to be a part of the public infrastructure. Is Microsoft going to be using it a lot? Yes. Do you, Mr Ellis who isn't reading this, know why? It's because Redmond isn't such a big place, but MS is a huge company, so I'm guessing that they account for most of the business that goes on there. Yet it's still going to be a public bridge and if MS is to be in charge of providing Redmond's public infrastructure, it's only fair that they are declared owners of the town first. As it is, the fact that the company which is probably the biggest employer in town as well as, I assume, a significant generator of income is paying for half of a public bridge is actually nice.

If it weren't MS but some local industry, then this would be trumpeted as money well spent (reducing congestion on the freeway, enabling more efficient functioning of the town's industry, so many people will be crossing the new bridge every day doing their jobs, yadda, yadda, yadda...) even if all of it were state money.

OK, so a number of construction companies will earn around $36mln, of which half will come out of taxpayer pocket and the other half from Microsoft shareholders. I am probably wrong on this, but I thought the "financial stimulus" is, among others, designed to keep struggling construction industry afloat using taxpayers money, and this seems to be exactly this.

The new bridge will be publicly accessible and "in 52% useful" to general population, so where is the controversy?

Why did the Microsoft chief exec cross the road?

Oh, God. Sorry. I'm going.

This is an April Fools joke?

Or is it proprietary and you have to pay the MS TAX to cross it ?

If FAT-OFF Ballmer needs to cross it better be sturdy.

"Whether Microsoft's bigwigs carry $11m in their pockets is unlikely...."

Possibly true, it'd be a bit bulky. They need to get 'em to nip home and grab it out of the sock drawer.

Let's see. MS is suppling 17.5 million and the city (thru the stimulus package) is supplying 11 million? Yet MS employee traffic is less than half the total? Yet it will be a public road?

Um, sounds fair to me. Where's the problem?

Paris, because even she can tell when fair's fair...

How much stimulus will it take to fix Vista?

At least Microsoft is paying for a large chunk of the bridge. Let alone it wouldn't cost as much if there wasn't train tracks as well. B'sides it is going over a highway.

In Toronto, IBM has a bridge to go to one of their campuses. Interesting thing is that it's like a typical exit off a highways except it's a street that's not even divided. They couldn't put up a light instead? In another IBM location, they have their own exit and entrance off a secondary road.

Trees on a bridge is the height of stupidity.

The soil will be to thin to provide water in summer, and it will be waterlogged in winter , unless some fancy drainage system is put in.Extra load on structure will need to be extra strong .

The roots will have insufficient anchorage and is the trees do survive , they will fall over when it gets windy.

However , it is highly likely that the architect(or draughtsman) who drew this pretty picture did what he/she does on the picture of any proposed structure. Show trees,

Regardless of whether it makes any sense.

My own pretty picture is provided.