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.'"

12 of 266 comments (clear)

  1. Return of the terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Looks like client-server was a fad. The terminal is back, only now the mainframe is at another company and the terminal is called browser.

    1. Re:Return of the terminal by Coryoth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Looks like client-server was a fad. The terminal is back, only now the mainframe is at another company and the terminal is called browser.

      Which seems a terrible shame really - surely there are better ways of running an application over a network than via a browser. After years of using the network transparency of X11 I find this whole move to browser based applications disappointing. Sure, the X protocol doesn't work well over slower connections (it's too chatty), but really wouldn't it be better to just fix those issues (such as with FreeNX) or write a better system so that we can actually have full normal GUIs instead of whatever can be kluged into a browser? Given the prevalence of web based applications I guess the answer is no. My best guess as to why is that, simply, Windows lack of network transparent display and market dominance trained people to have low expectations. Browser based stuff looks good in comparison to what's generally available for Windows so people assume it is a step forward instead of the step sideways that it appears to be to me.
    2. Re:Return of the terminal by massysett · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sadly, not much have happned on the usability front comparing the average form based input page and the 3270 terminal system anon. 1972. Chances are that people is going to be fed up with subpar performacne and cluncky interfaces and head back to the "fat client".

      Have you tried using Google Calendar? It is by far the MOST usable calendar app I have ever seen. Forget about forms. It's the only calendar app I've ever used that's actually intuitive. I can simply type "Dentist appointment on 2/24 from 10:00am to 11:00am at 1315 New Hampshire Ave" and GCal parses all this info into the appropriate chunks (date, time, location, etc) and stores it.

      Last time I looked, it's the fat client that's stupid here. Outlook or GroupWise makes me jump through hoops on their forms. Tab to date, tab to time, tab to location, click and drag little widgets. It's Outlook and Groupwise that are using 1972-style forms. All they've done is put some pretty pictures on the forms and made them largely mouse-based (which actually makes them HARDER to use than 1972-style dumb terminal forms!)

      Bad user interfaces are unfortunately quite common, but it's not a fat vs thin client thing. Google right now is an interface innovator. I'll take GCal, with its ability to quickly type in an appointment, over Outlook or GroupWise any day.

  2. Re:really? by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Remember they offer a free trial until April 30th. I wonder if they're counting businesses that are using the free trial.

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  3. bullshit or not by thesupermikey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google Apps seems like a really great idea for Universities. We spend SO much money on MS Office and related products. Graduate Students in my department had to share computers (6 to a PC) until this summer. Now we have crippled dell's which can barely run powerpoint, or do any significant work in Photoshop.

    --
    Mikey
    I've always been the kinda guy to fall for the girl dressed like an eskimo.
    1. Re:bullshit or not by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're in school for christ sake, how about have a class or two about the libre software tools in the 100 level?

      Umm, how does this help mitgate any of the points I made?

      The rest of your comment is nonsense. There are plenty of schools that have made the move to libre software already. And they haven't collapsed in upon themselves as you are alluding.

      I never said they would collapse, I simply pointed out some of the many reasons why Google Docs is more suited to the academic setting than OpenOffice. Calling someone an idiot because they did not move to OpenOffice instead is what is nonsense.

      As for the mac users, isn't there a port of OpenOffice to that already?

      Sure there is. It is just immensely slow. It is actually faster for me to run the Linux native version in Kubuntu, in a VM running on top of OS X, than it is for me to run the last version of NeoOffice I tested. The developers are making progress and I applaud their effort, but in the end Google docs opens instantly and is responsive, while NeoOffice takes a minute or more to load and can't even keep up with my typing much of the time on a machine significantly faster than what the average user will have.

      Anyways, bullshit whining. There are libre software choices, you just have to pull your head out of your arse and look around.

      You're the one who has to realize that being free and open is a feature, and not a particularly important one to many people. You just assume it is the best choice for someone because it is open, but that is completely a false assumption. Sometime a closed source tool is a better choice for me and for most people in general.

      There are two types of people...

      ...those who assert false dichotomies in an attempt to oversimplify the world so they don't have to think, and those who objectively view every choice without blinders on. You'll find my name on IETF drafts, and I've contributed to many open source projects. That does not mean it is always the best solution to a given problem.

  4. Data under Google's care - Guaranteed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My one primary concern about data services like this that rely on another company storing your businesses data and communications off-site under their control is what recourse does one have for loss of data? Is Google guaranteeing their storage? If so, how is the guarantee backed up (so to speak)?

    1. Re:Data under Google's care - Guaranteed? by cyberianpan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why do you trust say your IT department not to lose data ? In fact if Google loses your data they risk losing tens of thousands of customers so they're going to try harder. Email, collaboration tools etc are at this point commodity software: pretty obvious what they do , pretty low down the food chain on value add. They are perfect for outsourcing.

  5. For the small company by BuR4N · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Will probably be a hit among smaller companies that can stand the fact that their data will be stored elsewhere, and possible never be deleted.

    As I see that it would be hard for Enterprises, of any moderate size, to store any remotly sensitive data on googles disks. In their case it would mostly be used as a way to work together, and then one might ask if gotomeeting or any other internet meeting service + openoffice/office/staroffice is a better solution. I guess time will tell...

    --
    http://www.intellipool.se/ - Intellipool Network Monitor
  6. Re:open source + web services vice by alucinor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not supernova, superSCOva. They're gong to turn into a mega-SCO that will last for many many years I'm afraid. There are too many signs that they're not able to compete technologically anymore: if they clone Google's services, then they remove some of their own lock-in ability and undercut their $100 to $400 office licenses, canabilizing themselves. So litigation is going to be their play when they find that not every open source company is going to want to buy licenses from them because some nebulous unidentified MS IP might be somewhere in FLOSS. That's already very SCO-like.

    IBM is still around because they make gobs of cash from an extremely diverse portfolio. MS: only Windows and Office generate enough revenue to matter to the company. I don't doubt MS will come through it much like Sun has come through their own implosion, but even IBM avoided a huge drop like Sun, Cray, Xerox, or AT&T did back at the end of their own heydays.

    --
    random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
  7. Re:Cost of Communications by um...+Lucas · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Very funny that this was brought up before...

    Let's figure the cost of a printed page (offset, NOT laser) at half a cent. Maybe distribution and all that brings it up to a penny (we'll call it 5 cents PER PAGE to be on the absurdly high side). Figure that McDonalds gives each employee 20 pages of documents, that's 1 dollar per employee for all the communications they require to do their jobs.

    Now figure a computer for $300, DSL for $40 per month.

    Say there's 40 employees there that share the single computer. After 2 months, the cost of the DSL has outstripped the old distribution method. The computer isn't getting paid for, and in fact McDonalds now needs to hire an IT team to service the area (yes, it's google that runs the apps, but someones got to make sure the computers are running in the store), adding additional costs.

  8. Re:No real threat by Bearhouse · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OK, but are you sure that they really want Win + MS Office, or would they be happy with something that offered the same functionality and a familiar interface (no steep learning curve)? Sure they would. There's a lot of debate here about Linux etc. being too 'hard' for the non-geek user - from my direct experince, it's a valid point. However, this is less applicable in a 'big company' environment where most PCs are (or should be) pre-configured and then locked down. I use, and have installed for clients, both XP with Office and *nix with OO. Once you've got things setup OK, (takes similar time with both) there's little difference in training and support. People familiar with Office can move to OO quickly. Also, when the function is compelling enough, and the learning experience not too tough, non tech-professionals can adopt new functions & applications quickly. Do you think that all the people using MySpace, YouTube, Flickr etc. are all geeks? For a more 'serious' application, what about salesforce.com? Many of the posters here seem to want to dump this debate into the same old black/white right/wrong box. ONE of them is more insightful - this stuff is complementary, not a return to the old 'dumb terminal' days, just another possibility to be evaluated and used where appropriate.