Slashdot Mirror


Google Apps Deciphered

Lorin Ricker writes "Computing in the Cloud — Free Apps — Outsource It! Yippee! Automation TCO nirvana at last! You can hear the non-technical managers and home-users unite in grateful song and dance! If we can just offload our office applications and data to the Cloud Known As Google, that apparently bottomless source of storage, search and now other useful capabilities, our office automation problems will be solved! Hooray! 'Well, just y'all hold up there a minit, lil' cowboy. Thar's a few thangs y'all oughta know 'bout afore ya go rushin' off...' If John Wayne didn't say exactly that, well, he should'a." Keep reading for the rest of Lorin's review. Google Apps Deciphered -- Compute in the Cloud to Streamline Your Desktop author Scott Granneman pages 552 publisher Prentice Hall rating 7 reviewer Lorin Ricker ISBN 0-13-700470-2 summary A practical, comprehensive and useful guide to Google Apps Scott Granneman's new book Google Apps Deciphered — Compute in the Cloud to Streamline Your Desktop is a very useful technical overview about deploying Google Apps. It promotes a contagiously positive "we're gonna be saved" view of Google's ambitious initiative to provide our user communities with the perfect environment to counterbalance the Microsoft-centric archipelago of computing workstations. Good on Google, and good for Mr. Granneman for providing this practical overview, a comprehensive how-to for deploying Google Apps in any workplace.

And yet, to dampen our somewhat overly enthusiastic spirits, along comes none other than RMS himself in the role of the cowboy philosopher, with words of warning regarding the collective wisdom of committing all our eggs to the Google/Cloud basket: "Hold on there, pilgrim." The present book review is not the place to engage in this particular debate (see Ben Rothke's illuminating review of Greg Conti's recent book, Googling Security) — suffice it to say that Google Apps Deciphered pays no attention whatsoever to the issues of data security, privacy, and ownership.

The business wisdom of committing proprietary information, trade secrets, sensitive data, competitive analysis, private reports, personal/identity and non-public customer data is not even acknowledged as Granneman launches enthusiastically, without reservation, into his topics. Readers seeking any guidance on the legal, statutory, ethical and practical issues regarding data security in the Cloud will come up empty-handed in Google Apps Deciphered — start with Conti's book instead. In fairness, however, the whole concept of Cloud data storage is in the formative stages of discussion and understanding by many of us; still, I find myself wishing that Granneman's book had at least given a nod to and perhaps delineated the issues at hand, rather than jumping uncritically into the presumed virtues of total Cloud commitment.

That said, it was my only real gripe about Google Apps Deciphered. Taking it at face value, this book is a sure-footed guide to deploying Google Apps at its current state of development and fitness for duty.

The author starts out with an Introductory chapter which lays out the benefits (but without the down-side) of Cloud computing, and extols the general virtues of Google Apps itself — that's the cheerleading part of the book. Where appropriate, several of the chapters are neatly tied off with a list of supporting references, nearly all of which are websites or online articles cited by title, author (where relevant and available), and full URL.

The meat of the book is a comprehensive how-to for Google Apps, in six parts of a few chapters each: Part I "Getting Started with Google Apps" covers the selection of the appropriate "edition" of Apps, and then goes on to discuss migration issues for existing user data (email, contacts and calendars), concluding with advice on managing Apps services.

Part II covers email — not from an individual 's "I've got a gmail account of my own" perspective, but from the corporate or organizational "let's convert from Exchange Server" ambition. Part III similarly covers Google Calendar.

Part IV addresses Google Docs, Google's answer to Microsoft's Office Suite. Part V is about Google Sites, while Part VI picks up various miscellanea, including Google Talk, the Start Page, Message Security and Recovery (no, not exactly about data security), and finally, Google Video.

Park VII consists of three Appendices, one addressing "Backing Up Google Apps" (sic! — but why? Doesn't adopting the Cloud forgive us of this responsibility?); the next covers "Dealing with Multiple Accounts" (apparently, the existence of certain pre-existing Google accounts can complicate a new deployment); and finally, an appendix which touts "Google Chrome: A Browser Built for Cloud Computing."

For the most part, each of the Parts is similarly constructed, with chapters covering "Setting Up...", "Things to Know About Using..." and "Integrating ... with Other Software and Services" for gmail, Calendar, Docs, Sites and the rest. And herein lies the strength of the book as a how-to deployment guide. Scott Granneman is a well-regarded author, educator and consultant to the free and open source software community, having previously written good books about Linux, Knoppix, Firefox and more. He brings this expertise and experience directly to bear on the practical problems of deployment and committing an organization's computing resources and users (or at least a part of them) to Google's Cloud resources.

These how-to chapters are comprehensive; they anticipate and resolve many of the practical problems one would encounter during deployment with directions and advice which is obviously hard-won, based on the real-world expertise of the author. He's clearly done the Apps deal himself, and writes from actual experience, not from the hypothetical.

As examples of these comprehensive deployment recipes, the chapter on gmail includes consideration of: folder structures and limitations; live cutover considerations; IMAP and POP; migration tools; issues special to Exchange Server; mbox and Maildir stores; techniques and tools for actually moving bulk messages (and having them land correctly); specific issues with Outlook, Hotmail, Thunderbird, Macs, web-based email, and more; and solving common problems. With this thoroughness, it's likely that most problems and issues of deployment are anticipated and covered — the rare thing that's not can probably be figured out by analogy with what Scott does address. And so on for the other Google Apps as well.

The author also comes clean about the various limits and restrictions imposed on Google Apps accounts and deployments, and delineates these according to the five Editions of Apps: Standard, Premiere, Team, Education, and Partner (free and paid modes). For example, Google Docs imposes strict limits on document file sizes, and "at most a limit of 5,000 documents and presentations and 5,000 images." (Really. Is this adequate for even the average office worker over the long-term? What about prolific Sally the tech-writer, or John "the tool" over in proposals? Are such limits practical for an enterprise?) There are more such things scattered throughout the book, as well as existing problems (such as the previously mentioned "multiple accounts" issue) which, honestly, only serve to bolster the common impression that many Google products are in a perpetual state of beta.

This book belongs in the hands of every technical staff who gets charged by their employer with the responsibility for a Google Apps deployment. If that's where your company is going, then Scott Granneman's book will no doubt save countless hours of experimentation, false starts and problem solving — it's a serious practical, technical leg up on what will be a non-trivial data and environment migration effort.

Given his target — the why/benefits of adopting the Google Apps/Cloud approach, and how to get it done — Google Apps Deciphered scores well for hitting its mark. I gave it slightly lower marks for its lack of coverage of the "should you even do this?" data security and privacy issues, and because it only hints at some of the pre-planning, project costing considerations that must be considered by any enterprise which is contemplating this commitment.

I opened this book thinking that I'd likely try or do some of the deployment exercises for myself — but I closed it with the conviction that, for me and my own SOHO business needs, Google Apps is not yet ready for my own prime time. Helping me come to that conclusion made the book very worthwhile; for others, your mileage will of course vary. I am convinced that, as awareness of the data security and privacy issues matures, and approaches to these evolve and improve, Cloud Computing will become ubiquitous to various degrees and needs — as if it's not already — and probably sooner than we suspect. In that event, Google Apps Deciphered and its future editions will be among the most useful of guides.

You can purchase Google Apps Deciphered -- Compute in the Cloud to Streamline Your Desktop from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

91 comments

  1. Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Yippee! Automation TCO nirvana at last! Hooray! 'Well, just y'all hold up there a minit, lil' cowboy. Thar's a few thangs y'all oughta know 'bout afore ya go rushin' off...' If John Wayne didn't say exactly that, well, he should'a."

    Shut the fuck up, Spongebob. Are you writing me a book review or trying to sell me a used car, asshole?

    1. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      SIGNED. Two paragraphs in and my eyes started bleeding. I'm going to go chop off Lorins hands now, does anybody care to join me?

    2. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      seconded. Its not a review, its a soapbox.

    3. Re:Summary by Bou · · Score: 1

      Seconded, I've read Markov chained texts that made more sense to me.

    4. Re:Summary by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 1

      Metaphors are hard, like rocks.

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    5. Re:Summary by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 1

      I know. My favourite is this one, from an English exam paper:

      "Long separated by cruel fate, the star-crossed lovers raced across the grassy field toward each other like two freight trains, one having left Cleveland at 6:36 p.m. traveling at 55 mph, the other from Topeka at 4:19 p.m. at a speed of 35 mph. "

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    6. Re:Summary by davidphogan74 · · Score: 1

      Good simile.

  2. what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I dislike Google Apps as much as the next non-buzzword-compliant greyheard, but, Lorin Ricker, you just can't fucking write. For one thing, if you're going to write a quirky lead-in to an article, you have to be good at it, otherwise you sound like a blathering idiot. And you, my friend, aren't very good at it.

    Please, take some freshman writing classes at your local community college. You appear to have some good points, but you just don't know how to say it.

    1. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hez in ur intarweb, killing ur english.

    2. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I actually tried to make sense of the review. Rather than being about the book, it's actually about why he doesn't like Google Apps and why he's annoyed that a book on Google Apps doesn't spend its time agreeing with him.

      Again, he's right. But it's like reading Dwakins fanboys defend evolution - they may be right, but they're such bad debaters and orators that they make Fred Phelps sound like Aristotle.

    3. Re:what? by Quothz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Please, take some freshman writing classes at your local community college. You appear to have some good points, but you just don't know how to say it.

      I'm going to have nightmares about being attacked by thousands of hyphens, each talking like a John Wayne impersonator on methamphetamines.

    4. Re:what? by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm going to have nightmares about being attacked by thousands of hyphens, each talking like a John Wayne impersonator on methamphetamines.

      Shouldn't that nightmare be about thousands of em-dashes rather than hyphens? There aren't any hyphens in the review, except those in the last paragraph (which, incidentally, should be either em-dashes set closed or en-dashes set open, not pairs of hyphens.)

      Also, anyone who sets em-dashes open, as is done in most of the review, shouldn't be allowed to use them at all.

    5. Re:what? by doom · · Score: 2, Funny

      I actually tried to make sense of the review. Rather than being about the book, it's actually about why he doesn't like Google Apps and why he's annoyed that a book on Google Apps doesn't spend its time agreeing with him.

      Here, let me help you out by suggesting you read the third paragraph:

      That said, it was my only real gripe about Google Apps Deciphered. Taking it at face value, this book is a sure-footed guide to deploying Google Apps at its current state of development and fitness for duty.

      I guess it's a cause for celebration when a slash kid makes it through the first two paragraphs, but still. ("Insightful", huh?)

    6. Re:what? by Quothz · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't that nightmare be about thousands of em-dashes rather than hyphens?

      Hey, nightmares don't have to make sense.

      Okay, okay, I stand corrected.

    7. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it's a cause for celebration when a slash kid makes it through the first two paragraphs, but still.

      Did you actually read beyond the third paragraph? The OP's summary of the whole review seems pretty much spot on. He mentions here and there what you'd get from reading the table of contents, but there's no critical component beyond criticism of Google Apps itself. Hell, even the quote you paste, containing "at its current state of development and fitness for duty", is an obvious jibe at the platform.

      But, dammit, I'll give it to you. The word "sure-footed" is actually referring to the book itself. In that babbling mess of nonsense, he's actually used one albeit ill-fitting adjective to comment on the book. Perhaps the fanfic reject actually has some hope beyond being a target of molly-coddling by Special Olympics cheerleaders such as yourself. Every Lenny has his George.

    8. Re:what? by doom · · Score: 1

      Did you actually read beyond the third paragraph?

      Yeah. And just for you Anonymous, I read it again. There's a hell of a lot of description of what the book covers, and praise for getting what it gets right right. (I was, however, numbering paragraphs from 0. You guys got that, right?)

      The OP's summary of the whole review seems pretty much spot on.

      And that is a completely ridiculous thing to say.

      He mentions here and there what you'd get from reading the table of contents, but there's no critical component beyond criticism of Google Apps itself.

      Okay, allow me to give you some help also: "These how-to chapters are comprehensive; they anticipate and resolve many of the practical problems one would encounter during deployment with directions and advice which is obviously hard-won, based on the real-world expertise of the author. He's clearly done the Apps deal himself, and writes from actual experience, not from the hypothetical."

      Hell, even the quote you paste, containing "at its current state of development and fitness for duty", is an obvious jibe at the platform.

      Oh my, how dare the reviewer have an opinion different from yours!

      But, dammit, I'll give it to you. The word "sure-footed" is actually referring to the book itself.

      You're giving it to me all right.

      In that babbling mess of nonsense, he's actually used one albeit ill-fitting adjective to comment on the book. Perhaps the fanfic reject actually has some hope beyond being a target of molly-coddling by Special Olympics cheerleaders such as yourself.

      Is that an Obama joke?

      Every Lenny has his George.

      And every slashdot book review has a chorus of internet retards padding out the comments. Every single review, you get the usual blather from people who'd rather write than read any thing, let alone read a book.

    9. Re:what? by kklein · · Score: 1

      Amen.

      If one of my writing students handed me this mess, I'd hand it right back. I don't waste my time reading garbage like this.

    10. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      (I was, however, numbering paragraphs from 0. You guys got that, right?)

      This is literary criticism, not computer science. Please try to use the conventions of the discipline, which is to number paragraphs starting from unity. Do you go into a business meeting where words like "continuous", "differentiate" and "integrate" are used and go apoplectic when they aren't being used according as the definitions you learnt in AP/freshman calculus? Do you snort that not even Mandelbrot and Lebesgue would contemplate the usage you are brought down from your ivory tower to be forced to witness? Do your colleagues facepalm but reluctantly accept that the quirky geek is at least functional performing a sufficient subset of robotic duties that he's worth keeping on?

      Please also try not to "you guys" like you're some sort of higher being floating above the proles, their hands outstretched to you while you distribute nuggets of wisdom. I've been reading Slashdot since before it even had an account registration system, and I've never felt the need to register a username because I find the ideas and their expressions important but the egos irrelevant. Such transparently self-centred rhetoric as yours usually disappears by the late teenage years.

      "These how-to chapters are comprehensive; they anticipate and resolve many of the practical problems one would encounter during deployment with directions and advice which is obviously hard-won, based on the real-world expertise of the author. He's clearly done the Apps deal himself, and writes from actual experience, not from the hypothetical."

      Right, let's break that down, shall we? Let's actually analyse what you just pasted, without the sarcasm I used for "sure-footed" which you evidently interpreted as genuine praise.

      (1) "These how-to chapters are comprehensive" - ok, introductory summary, expecting evidence...

      (2) "they anticipate and resolve many of the practical problems one would encounter during deployment" - ok, excellent, here's our first sub-hypothesis. How does he do this, Lorin?

      (3) "with directions and advice" - oh my shit, this is getting better. What sort of directions and advice, Lorin? That's not actually answered until the next paragraph, which we shall analyse later to see whether it actually backs up his claim. But let's continue reading this paragraph.

      (4) "is obviously hard-won, based on the real-world expertise of the author" - "hard-won" is subsumed by "based on the real-world expertise", hence redundant. But we have a second sub-hypothesis that he writes based on his experience rather than, err, copying from a manual or what he's heard in a bar, I guess. So at least we know it's not one of those awful marketing releases. I'm not sure why I have to wait until half way through the review to find out that it's written by someone who actually has used what he's writing about(!), but I guess Lorin needed to get all his invective out of the way.

      (5) "He's clearly done the Apps deal himself," You just said that.

      (6) "and writes from actual experience," You just said that.

      (7) "not from the hypothetical." Thanks for clarifying what you just said.

      Now all the positive of (1) to (4) are irrelevant without some reasonable evidence to follow. So let's look at the next paragraph.

      (8) "As examples of these comprehensive deployment recipes, the chapter on gmail includes consideration of:" Oh - so - that - is - what - your - examples - are - of: at least he realises that his prose is so disjointed that he has to explain to the reader what he is doing. This sort of language reminds me of prep school writing exercises, where you'd have to carefully and explicitly delimit your essays to practice organisation which would later become implicit.

      (9) "folder structures and limitations; live cutover considerations; IMAP and POP; migration tools; issues special to Exchange Server; mbox and Maildir stores; techniques and tools for actually moving bulk me

  3. Incredible. by Archon-X · · Score: 0

    I've not seen a more disjointed collection of words for a long time.
    You're not quick, clever, witty, or even remotely talented at writing.

    If you don't have the knack, stick to the facts.

    1. Re:Incredible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've not seen a more disjointed collection of words for a long time.

      Counting in nanoseconds, are we? This is slashdot.

    2. Re:Incredible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree.

      I've seen better AI bots.

      At least they have psedo-humor.

    3. Re:Incredible. by iluvcapra · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He thinks it sounds informal and conversational, but really he just didn't want to read his typing back to himself before hitting the submit button. Or proofread, or even start with an outline and think about what he was trying to convey.

      Typewriter syndrome; communication by words, when sentences are required.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    4. Re:Incredible. by icepick72 · · Score: 1

      Amen. I was afraid the entire book was written in cowboy language. Now I don't want to read it regardless. The publisher should sue submitter for defamation!

    5. Re:Incredible. by geobeck · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've seen better AI bots.

      That's interesting. Tell me more.

      At least they have pseudo-humor.

      Why do you say they have pseudo-humor?

      Ha. Ha.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    6. Re:Incredible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen better AI bots.

      Yeah, I'd pick the Alice bot over this Lorin Ricker bot any day.

    7. Re:Incredible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But for an android, that is an eternity..."

  4. nice hit piece by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Grind your axe with Google Apps elsewhere, I came for a book review not an expose.

  5. I'm from texas... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and even my brain hurts from reading this post...please never do that again. ever.

  6. p0wn'd by al0ha · · Score: 1

    By Google Apps. Why would you use the cloud when there is little or no security (at least the security practices which keep each instance separated is unknown) and you don't own what you've put into the Google cloud; Google does.

    --
    Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
    1. Re:p0wn'd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The simple reason I won't move to the cloud (yet or anytime soon): I've used google apps and it is slow, unreliable, and buggy. What I get locally works much more reliably, and I would need about 3 years of good, stable reliability before I'd consider.

    2. Re:p0wn'd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had zero problems with it using the free version. Then again I'm really the only user of it. I use the free version to give myself multiple email addresses for different purposes. I'll use the google docs as a scratch sheet.

    3. Re:p0wn'd by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 0

      The simple reason I won't move to the cloud (yet or anytime soon):

      Cloud computing doesn't have involve Google or Amazon. There's nothing stopping you from building your own private cloud. Nothing at all.

  7. Mod Parent -1, redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AC beat you to it. No reason to pile on.

  8. I gotta be honest... by SOOPRcow · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was so distraught after reading that summary that my co-workers had to put me in a mental rehab facility. They now have me posting here to tell you this so I can overcome my fears and once again enter society as a normal person.

    1. Re:I gotta be honest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They now have me posting here to tell you this so I can overcome my fears and once again enter society as a normal person.

      Heh, good luck with that.

    2. Re:I gotta be honest... by troll8901 · · Score: 3, Funny

      mental rehab facility

      ... also known as a cubicle.

    3. Re:I gotta be honest... by TimeTraveler1884 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You have to admit, there is something satisfying in reading a Slashdot summary, going "What the fuck was that?", then to read the comments and find you are not alone in your reaction.

    4. Re:I gotta be honest... by __aasqbs9791 · · Score: 1

      ...They now have me posting here to tell you this so I can overcome my fears and once again enter society as a normal person.

      First off, I've yet to actually meet a "normal person." Second, if I did I'm sure they would be in need of "-1, overrated" moderation. What would be so good about being normal? I'm certain they would be ill-equipped to handle reality. After all, it is full of people like us!

    5. Re:I gotta be honest... by quickOnTheUptake · · Score: 1

      I decided halfway through to just read the comments to get the salient points.
      Unfortunately, with everyone bitching, I still don't know what they were.

      --
      Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
      Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
    6. Re:I gotta be honest... by Bozdune · · Score: 1

      I made the same decision, gave up on the comments for the same reason, was about to make exactly your point.. and then I encountered your comment. Very strange sensation.

    7. Re:I gotta be honest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought exactly the same! Worst piece of writing on Slashdot.

    8. Re:I gotta be honest... by EveLibertine · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, the bitching and the lack of salient points are the all the salient points. So mission accomplished I guess.

    9. Re:I gotta be honest... by oliderid · · Score: 1

      It is also the only place where you can get flamed down/tortured to death before being dismembered and cut into little pieces because your summary wasn't really funny :-). (well after the 3rd paragraph it is getting interesting IMHO).

  9. Re:clown-computing. by Gizzmonic · · Score: 1

    Starring Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Gates?

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
  10. Re:clown-computing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Starring a black man, a white woman, a Chinese woman, and a Native American man. That way the viewers will say "Wow, what an artifically ethnically diverse cast!" If any white males are part of the team, they will have to be depicted as effete, nerdy, inadequate, incompetent, or insecure, lest we offend anyone. Lord knows we can't just have a TV show without including some element of social engineering and diversity sensitivity training.

    What's really great is when there is a commercial with a man and a woman. The person who uses Brand X and gets bad results has to be the man. That way the woman can humor and patronize him in a self-congratulatory way as she experiences the good results of using the name brand. It would be so terrible and awful and sexist and discriminatory if those roles were ever reversed, so only a tiny percentage of commercials deviate from this pattern. Again, the sweet Lord knows we can't have some barker hawking products without an element of social engineering. It would be doubleplusbad!

  11. He can't even do as he says. by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    The present book review is not the place to engage in this particular debate (see Ben Rothke's illuminating review of Greg Conti's recent book, Googling Security) -- suffice it to say that Google Apps Deciphered pays no attention whatsoever to the issues of data security, privacy, and ownership.

    Really, then why are you doing it?

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  12. Mod this redundant too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AC beat you to it. No reason to pile on.

  13. What. The. Shit. Pilgrim. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy shit. Seriously? Was this review an exercise in throwing as much random shit onto slashdot as poorly as you can? Awesome work. F.

  14. blurb by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    That was an extremely poorly written blurb. I had to come to the page to voice my hate before I realized it was some sort of review, which I don't plan to read since the blurb was such a turn-off

  15. Mod parent troll by texwtf · · Score: 0

    | "you just can't fucking write." as AC-

    how about a little decorum? Normal person (though that may not apply here) + anonymity + audience = exactly what again?

    1. Re:Mod parent troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish to propose the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory Fuckwad Theory, which asserts that for every valid argument made on the Internet, there'll be some Nazi who uses a cliched quote, "rule" or comic strip to try to tear down that argument.

      Cue the obvious...

    2. Re:Mod parent troll by pcolaman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually he was spot on, which is why he wasn't modded troll. You should be modded troll for trying to defend an attack on our brains by way of his mutilation of the English Language. Or maybe I should just say, "He can't fucking write and you are fucking wrong."

    3. Re:Mod parent troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > "He can't fucking write and you are fucking wrong."

      I knew country music would come into this at some point.

    4. Re:Mod parent troll by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      how about a little decorum?

      You must be new here. How much did you pay for that slashdot ID?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  16. Speaking of Google Apps... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll take the opportunity to shamelessly plug Google Apps Improved Login (GAIL). GAIL allows administrators of Educational and Premier Edition Google Apps domains the ability to have a custom login page (instead of Google's generic one) and the ability for admins to login as users in order to troubleshoot problems.

  17. Ugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the shittest book review I've ever had the displeasure of reading. Kill yourself.

  18. Saying one thing - yet doing another. by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And yet, to dampen our somewhat overly enthusiastic spirits, along comes none other than RMS himself in the role of the cowboy philosopher, with words of warning regarding the collective wisdom of committing all our eggs to the Google/Cloud basket: "Hold on there, pilgrim." The present book review is not the place to engage in this particular debate

    Except - that's exactly what you do throughout your entire 'review'. Instead of actually review the book, you use continually use the contents of the books as springboard for expressing your point of view in that debate. Disingenuous at best. Dishonest at worst.

  19. And I have a bridge to sell you.... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    Anyone who's dumb enough to put their retirement money in stocks or thinks "the cloud" is a safe, secure, consistently available place to put their data gets exactly what they deserve. Really guys. A little paranoia is *healthy,* OK?

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  20. Someone write a readable summary for this summary! by fadir · · Score: 1

    I still don't know what he was going to tell. I stopped reading after the 3rd sentence or so because it was just unbearable and hurt my eyes.

  21. FYC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck your cloud

  22. Any comments on the book? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, so I see about 30 comments here, but they're all just complaints about the reviwer's style - does nobody have anything to say about the actual subject of the review? Slashdot commentary is becoming just about worthless...

    1. Re:Any comments on the book? by mokus000 · · Score: 1

      You mean there was a review in that pile of words?

      --
      Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
  23. Re:clown-computing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry, we're talking about fucking clown shoes over here. What the hell are you going on about? A clown-shoe fetishist is the rarest of all minorities; therefore they should be featured in all commercials.

  24. Someone write a readable summary for this comment! by Improv · · Score: 1

    I still don't know what he was trying to say. I stopped reading after the second sentence or two because it was just unbearable and hurt my eyes.

    --
    For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
  25. Paraphrase RMS you say? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    ...along comes none other than RMS himself in the role of the cowboy philosopher, with words of warning regarding the collective wisdom of committing all our eggs to the Google/Cloud basket: "Hold on there, pilgrim."

    I cannot, under any circumstances, imagine RMS saying: "Hold on there, pilgrim." You, Lorin Ricker, shall be visited this evening by the ghosts of beards past, present and future...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Paraphrase RMS you say? by wmbetts · · Score: 1

      Before it happened I couldn't imagine him dancing to a rap song at MIT.

      --
      "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". - stolen from Dan C alt.os.linux.slackware
    2. Re:Paraphrase RMS you say? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Before it happened I couldn't imagine him dancing to a rap song at MIT.

      Thank you *so* much for that. Now, how am I suppose to sleep tonight? Time to call on an old friend: Oh Absolut, how I've missed you...

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  26. Mod this redundant too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AC beat you to it. No reason to pile on.

  27. IBM, Microsoft, Google by turgid · · Score: 1

    Google Apps and "the Cloud" (sounds like a seventies pop group) is where Google becomes the new Microsoft.

    The Great Unwashed will flock to move over to Google Apps and before they know it, they'll be locked in. They'll be beholden to Google.

    You mark my words...

    1. Re:IBM, Microsoft, Google by CyDharttha · · Score: 2, Informative

      Google Apps and "the Cloud" (sounds like a seventies pop group) is where Google becomes the new Microsoft.

      The Great Unwashed will flock to move over to Google Apps and before they know it, they'll be locked in. They'll be beholden to Google.

      You mark my words...

      Isn't it good that Google Docs saves documents to your desktop as ODF by default, can export PDF easily, and can read/export iCal format? Using open formats ensures that we can move to another platform if necessary.

    2. Re:IBM, Microsoft, Google by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 2, Informative

      Exactly. Not only do they allow you to export, they almost always write a publicly available api with hooks in a number of different languages which let you automate the process.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    3. Re:IBM, Microsoft, Google by turgid · · Score: 1

      Microsoft used to be pretty "open" at the start too.

  28. Re:clown-computing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think a lot of the commercials with men and women are marketed toward women, who historically do the shopping. Thus, the woman, representing their target consumer, uses the "better" brand. Also, as the superior sex, men aren't swayed by marketing bullshit, so why pander to them?

    Ok, that last part was a joke.

  29. Stop being paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People seriously need to drop this paranoia about the cloud. These same people transported back in time would have said the moving picture was the work of the devil and the automobile was too. Get with it, and observe Google's immaculate track record for protecting the privacy of its users, and put away the tinfoil hats.

  30. Ick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I couldn't possibly read this without losing my lunch. I only clicked through to see the tumultuously negative reaction I knew it would provoke.

  31. This sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After my eyes stopped bleeding, I deleted SlashDot from my links toolbar, then i gave myself a mental enema (half a pint of vodka). Then another one. But the lead-in still wouldn't delete itself from my cache, so i felt compelled to come back here and comment.

    Slashdot, please don't let this 'person' write another story here - ever, ever, EVER. This is not a joke. I am not a literary critic (by profession) yet this qualifies as the worst EVER lead-in to a story. Please delete the author.

    I couldn't even bring myself to read the story. Maybe s/he had a point -- I suppose I'll never know.

    Time for another mental enema -- maybe then i'll pass out and the horror will pass.

  32. Google Apps Source Code by m85476585 · · Score: 1

    Speaking of deciphering Google Apps, has anyone looked at their Javascript source code? The Google Docs JS file is 300kb with almost no white space. It might be interesting to deobfuscate it. So far using find-and-replace, I inserted line breaks after every semicolon and curly bracket. At the top there are a bunch of two-letter functions that look like C #define statements, for example:

    function na(a,b){ return a.filter=b }

    There are also a bunch of similarly named variables with common objects, like

    var o="appendChild"

    It shouldn't be too difficult to replace every instance of these variables and functions with what they actually do in the rest of the code, but find-and-replace won't work.

    In addition to obfuscation, all this stuff reduces the code size, kind of like compression where you have a table of commonly repeated stuff. Analyzing the frequency of use of each of these functions might reveal whether they obfuscated the code only to save space or also to prevent reverse-engineering. For example, if there is a function like this that is used just once, it wouldn't make sense to make it into a function to save space, and they must be trying to prevent reverse-engineering.

    Of course, there is no way to see their server-side scripts.

    1. Re:Google Apps Source Code by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Just sounds like Yahoo's YUI Compressor. It compresses the javascript to make it smaller by doing everything you just said. I use it on all my sites to save a few kb.

    2. Re:Google Apps Source Code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because they write in one language, run it through GWT and it outputs JavaScript which gets downloaded and run in the browser's interpreter. JavaScript is the new p-Code.

    3. Re:Google Apps Source Code by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      >> JavaScript is the new p-Code.

      May $DEITY help us.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
  33. LR speaketh with silverlight tongue by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    No! No! You are missing the point! LR writes like the next Billy S., but alas he useth Google Apps !

    Would that he had wooed beneath the Silverlight. Tis' Google that belies his trade. The thesaurus, grammar checker, and their link decayed doth kill his fire as the earthen blade!

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  34. Why? by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    Why should I read further. After reading that first paragraph, Lorin Ricker looks like an idiot.

  35. It will never be safe by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    IMHO cloud computing is impossible to secure. At best it is ALMOST safe. If you own the cloud, and the cloud is in a jar, and the jar is in a safe, and the safe is in a concrete room, and the room is in a lead building, and the lead building has a mote... If they are smart, Google will leave "beta" in its description forever.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    1. Re:It will never be safe by jc42 · · Score: 1

      IMHO cloud computing is impossible to secure.

      To be more specific, the Google Cloud is impossible to secure against google.

      There are a number of precedents that encourage careful people to worry about this. Google may not (for now) be as evil as Microsoft or IBM, but you'd be a fool to trust the data about your company or organization to google's hands. And everything in their Cloud is accessible to them.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    2. Re:It will never be safe by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      To be more specific, the Google Cloud is impossible to secure against google.

      Bloody oath, you put your finger on it. All we have is a mission statement to protect us.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    3. Re:It will never be safe by cheros · · Score: 1

      I think you make a mistake here. It's NOT impossible to secure, for all you know Google could have done a good job, you don't know either way.

      What you CAN say is that it is impossible to TRUST Google. You have no solid contracts, the company gets up to all sorts of shenanigans with your data (which, btw, you agreed to, read the T&Cs you accepted) and ownership and use of the information you store with them is very much in doubt.

      I don't create a business dependency on companies I don't trust, even if I have a legal grip on them.

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
    4. Re:It will never be safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who does the mission statement refer to? You or them?

  36. Absolutely filthy language by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Well, just y'all hold up there a minit, lil' cowboy. Thar's a few thangs y'all oughta know 'bout afore ya go rushin' off...' If John Wayne didn't say exactly that, well, he should'a."

    What kind of filthy language is this? The person who wrote this is simply an idiot if he is thinking that he is creating humour. Post such things on /trash and not /.

  37. Check out GWEBS - makers of encryption for google by fotoflo · · Score: 1

    Hey all, First off, a disclaimer, i work for Global Web Security Systems (gWebs).

    Our software grabs outgoing and incoming data at the transport layer as you use google products and tosses it through GnuPG.

    Our MailCloak product encrypts gmail, (Yahoo, and MSN, etc) in firefox and IE.

    DocCloak, in private beta, will do the same thing for Google Docs, and Zoho office.

    SaaSCloak, again in private beta, works with google sites, and we are adding several other cloud services.

    Check this stuff out at http://www.getmailcloak.com/ to install MailCloak

    and http://www.gwebs.com/ to learn more about the company.

  38. Moderators! by doom · · Score: 1

    Moderators: mark this "funny".

    Hard work like this deserves to be rewarded.