Slashdot Mirror


Google Apps Premier Edition Launches, Widely Used

Tookis writes "Google's online productivity suite (Google Apps) has already replaced Microsoft products at more than 100,000 small to medium enterprises. Additionally, it's been deployed for serious work-related projects at two of the largest companies in the world. Product manager for Google Enterprise Kevin Gough was quick to point out that although the premier edition of Google Apps only just launched, it's already been adopted by companies like GE, Procter & Gamble, Prudential and Loreal. He goes on to describe the role of Apps: to augment, not necessarily replace existing IT solutions. Just the same, he says, the role of Apps can be powerful where traditional services may be too expensive. Says Gough, 'There's a large segment that's under-served by today's productivity tools. Production workers and retail employees for instance. 48% of all employees actually don't even have an email address. That's because the cost of hardware, software and maintenance has made it prohibitively expensive to provide email to employees.'"

15 of 266 comments (clear)

  1. really? by um...+Lucas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Somehow, I'm having issue believing that number. 100,000? Maybe 100,000 companies have users that are using gmail accounts, but I just don't buy that 100,000 real businesses have switched over already, unless Jim-bob in his basement counts as a business...

    1. Re:really? by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Any company prepared to trust the bulk of their communication and data to a third party with those terms of service is nuts anyway. Everybody seems to be overlooking the 'we can rip this service out from under you at anytime we feel like it' and the 'we can impose arbitrary restrictions on your use at anytime we choose'.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    2. Re:really? by kripkenstein · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Everybody seems to be overlooking the 'we can rip this service out from under you at anytime we feel like it' and the 'we can impose arbitrary restrictions on your use at anytime we choose'.
      Actually the same goes for people using MS Office. Microsoft can decide not to patch some flaw that essentially makes MS Office unusable for certain people (due to security reasons, for example). Microsoft can also raise the prices for updates to where it isn't cost-effective for many of their clients. They can 'push' updates that reduce functionality. In theory.

      In practice, both Google and Microsoft won't do such things, because (1) 'ripping the service out from under clients' (as you well put it) just isn't good business, and (2) contracts. A contract with Google will ensure a certain service for some-odd years, just like a contract with Microsoft. No more, and no less.

      However, you are 100% right about both of them - even if it is unlikely that these doomsday scenarios occur, they are possible. Entrusting your IT over to Google (by hosting it on their servers) or to Microsoft (by running their closed-source programs, and in addition being locked-in to them) is somewhat a 'leap of faith'. For those that value their personal autonomy, there are really only two options: in-house development, which is completely impractical for 99% of organizations, or using open-source software (as people reading this know already).

      Yet, the Microsoft and Google solutions will, I predict, continue to draw the vast majority of businesses: Microsoft are already entrenched, and Google are so ridiculously cheap it seems a crime not to use their service.
    3. Re:really? by Timesprout · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Lol. Microsoft has been doing it and is still doing it for years. People don't stop using Microsoft products do the
      I knew someone would come up with this. The difference is, and its a massive difference is that Google can deny you access to your data at any time they choose. With MS you still have physical access to your files, free viewers and converters, Open Office.org etc to access the information contained within so while incovenienced you can still carry on your business. Google shutting out your account leaves you with nothing.
      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
  2. O RLY? by beavis88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Production workers and retail employees for instance. 48% of all employees actually don't even have an email address. That's because the cost of hardware, software and maintenance has made it prohibitively expensive to provide email to employees.

    Or maybe, just maybe, 48% of all employees don't need email to get their jobs done. I know, it sounds heretical, but let's be honest, does K-Fed really need email to operate that McDonald's cash register? Nah, I didn't think so either.

  3. Re:open source + web services vice by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Microsoft is not going supernova. Not in 5 years not in 10 years.

    Let us take for example the vendor lock and switching costs. You can get decent oil change for your car for 20$. 10$ if you really clip coupons and are willing to let Joe's QuickLube to do it. And most car dealers charge 30$ for the very same service. Still there are millions of car owners who would happily pay 30$ to the dealer willingly.

    Now take a look at how difficult it is to use a competing product instead of Microsoft. The switching costs are high and there is very heavy vendor lock. In 5 years, the marketplace might become more level. Finally the corporations might start demanding true interoperability. MS might lose market share. From 90% share in Office and 80-85% share in browsers and 95% share in computers, it might go down. How low will it go, I cant guess. May be to 50%. May be to 33%. The profitability also might suffer. But after all is said and done, MS will still have decent market share and a decent profit making business. Look around, IBM is still around, isn't it? It was the IBM dinosaur around which nimble Microsoft ran circles around. 10 years from now there will be three dinosaurs, IBM, MSFT and GOOG. And there will be another nimble player.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  4. It replaces POP3 accounts, not Microsoft Office by dybdahl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm employed in a company that switched to Google Apps for Domains, and it works great. But it replaces our old e-mail service.

    The calendar part is getting better and better, especially the arrival of syncmycal has improved integration with MS Outlook, but it surely doesn't replace it, yet, because Google Calendar cannot sync with everything, yet.

    We're looking forward to use docs and spreadsheets, but it's still just an add-on to our existing in-house software.

  5. Re:Skeptical by fangorious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This service has been available (in beta, for free) for probably a year now, so [Google] aren't claiming that 100, 000 companies switched in a day.

  6. Re:No real threat by UtucXul · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You Linux freaks can foam at the mouth trying to convince anyone that Linux + open office will be widely adopted by corporates. People that actually work in corporates and support infrastructure, will never let that amateur junk in.
    But they have no problem with the professional junk that Microsoft puts out, right?

    I use LaTeX for pretty much all my document needs so I don't have a real vested interest in OpenOffice.org vs. MS Office, but it really isn't fair to call OO amateur. It did start life as a commerical product. And is the opposite of commercial really amateur? gcc is not a commercial compiler, but it certainly not amateur and has been used in lots of serious situations.
  7. Re:Replacement vrs. Inroads. by um...+Lucas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Half of all employees don't have email? I'm thinking if they've made it this far along without it, they probably don't need it...

    Does the checkout girl at the grocery store need email?
    How about the house painter?
    Or the guy that tears tickets in half at the movie theater?

    Is that the target market? I'm sure Microsoft is quaking in their boots about the prospect that they missed out on getting McDonalds to shell out for Exchange licenses for all their employees... :)

  8. complete and absolute BS (SOX) by saleenS281 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it's complete and absolute BS for one reason only: SOX compliance. Anyone running their business off of google apps is just begging to be run out of business by the government. There is absolutely no way, with the way google runs their apps, that you could ever meet security or retention requirements for SOX compliance.

    1. Re:complete and absolute BS (SOX) by lushmore · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This isn't a problem because

      1. Small businesses don't care about SOX.

      2. Google will beef up the service to meet the needs of publicly traded companies, thus making the Google option so much cheaper than managing the IT part of SOX compliance on your own that companies will have no choice but to use a hosted service.

      3. SOX is going away because it blows and it's driving companies away from our stock markets.

  9. Re:Not at P&G by dave562 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The amount of spreadsheets that would have to be converted would be impossible to fix ...

    This is exactly the point I was trying to allude to in an earlier post I made when I mentioned Excel's formula language. In any large enough organization, there is likely enough business intelligence coded into Excel spreadsheets by people who no longer work there that trying to convert all of it onto another platform would be ridiculous.

    I've seen the argument that a spreadsheet is a spreadsheet, and if you're starting from scratch, I think that is true. But a Google spreadsheet is not the same as a 20 page, fully formulated, linked to external datasources (via ODBC, SQL on the backend anyone?) Excel monster. And speaking of which, what do you do if you're using Google apps and you want to link to external data in say, an SQL server? Excel has great built in wizards that will link to just about any data source imaginable. Is Google going to port all of my financial data over there for me so that I can "access it from anywhere?"

  10. Re:No real threat by Compholio · · Score: 3, Insightful

    LaTeX ? Yes, very widely used, indeed (sarcasm)
    Try submitting to a scientific journal without it, or try writing a textbook (you ever wonder why they all look the same?), and you'll get back a list of organizations that you can pay to TeX your document for you. Since LaTeX easily outputs to PostScript and PDF it's also very easy to hand off your document to people that don't understand TeX.
  11. Sorry dude, you're misinformed by Optic7 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    1. Only publicly traded companies have to comply with SOX. I don't think the situation you described has anything to do with SOX.

    2. I can see your point that Google apps may not be compatible with SOX, but this would matter only to publicly traded companies.

    3. You haven't been paying attention to the news. I've seen multiple stories about SOX causing many small publicly traded companies to delist from the stock market and go private, and how it's causing businesses to skip the US stock markets when it comes time for them to do their IPO. In other words, yes, there's a general feeling that SOX is driving business away from the US. Here's an example article I found through a very quick search: Is SOX Driving Small Companies Overseas?

    SOX seems to be too onerous on most companies, and only the largest ones can properly put up the effort to meet its requirements. I'm not an expert, so I'm going by what I've read and heard on the news, and by the huge amount of IT changes that SOX has caused at my work. I'm as anti-corporate as they come, and I can see that SOX is having some negative effects. I think he's right that something is going to change.