Well, if Google switches to Google, they can save up to 50-70% on their enterprise email costs. Presumably they can then do this again, until they are paying a vanishing fraction of a penny on emails costs. No wonder GMail turns a profit.
In other news, the blinding geniuses at Google, whose shoes you are not fit to shine, recently announced a compression algorithm that uses MapReduce on BigTable running in The Cloud (TM) based on Node.js async javascript running on top of Chrome's V8 running in mobile data centers powered by renewable energy that can compress any data by at least one bit by harnessing the mighty power of buzzwords. Google is preparing a presentation in which they will shortly announce that they will be putting up a torrent containing every file on the internet using this technology.
Google is preparing a presentation in which they will shortly announce that they will be putting up a torrent containing every file on the internet using this technology.
For what it's worth, most of the numbers for Microsoft in the "assumptions" are wrong - I wonder if it's possible to have a set of assumptions such that this application wouldn't recommend a move to Google Apps?
What I found the most interesting however is that it's not possible to set some of the numbers in the assumptions below certain thresholds. For example, in the "unplanned downtime" section you're required to put in a number greater than 15 minutes.
Employees at Microsoft will be 2.8 times more productive when mobile
Except when they don't have an Internet connection, in which case they are 100% less productive!
Microsoft could add 612,500 GB of email space
Does anyone have any evidence that e-mail storage on Outlook is an issue? Since the e-mail may be stored locally and hard drives are infinite capacity (compared to the the 2GB allocation of Gmail), this sounds like a bogus argument.
there's a single version of the doc so everyone knows they are working on the latest version
Yeah, right. Works great until you need to really modify a document locally, because you are experimenting with major changes. Good luck merging it back with either platform.
Microsoft may spend as much as $3,750,000 in data recovery services to protect from natural disaster. By going Google you'd spend $0 and wait 0 weeks
Does anyone who is in charge of mission critical stuff advises to trust Google storage and not perform any extra backups? Really?
I love watching how Google slowly but surely loses all the goodwill they accumulated, in their quest to become just another $10B company. Business as usual.
Apparently they never heard of the built-in revision tracking in Office documents, and it completely ignores SharePoint. Google is sinking to Microsoft's level. This is as shameful and FUD-filled as the "Internet Explorer 8 - safer, faster, easier" message I see when browsing MSDN with Firefox.
In other news, the blinding geniuses at Google, whose shoes you are not fit to shine, recently announced a compression algorithm that uses MapReduce on BigTable running in The Cloud (TM) based on Node.js async javascript running on top of Chrome's V8 running in mobile data centers powered by renewable energy that can compress any data by at least one bit by harnessing the mighty power of buzzwords. Google is preparing a presentation in which they will shortly announce that they will be putting up a torrent containing every file on the internet using this technology.