[sdw2003] L.A. votes to "Go Google"; pressure shifts to Googleand the cloud

[Randall Shimizu]

I might be willing to consider Gmail for business use if it was a appliance.



----- Original Message ----
From: Paul Wochnick <paul.wochnick at gmail.com>
To: San Diego Windows 2003 User Group <sdw2003 at mattware.com>
Sent: Thu, October 29, 2009 4:47:59 PM
Subject: Re: [sdw2003] L.A. votes to "Go Google"; pressure shifts to Googleand  the cloud

SDSU is currently considering moving their email infrastructure to
Google. For Education and non-profits it is a very tempting solution,
especially in this economy.

Google is a very intriguing replacement for Exchange. For system
admins it provides most of the same features as Exchange. Users can
seamlessly use Outlook as their mail client like they would in an
Exchange environment and you can even have your AD authenticate for
it. Google can also replace the public folder infrastructure of
Exchange. The only thing that it can't do is store files in public
folders.

I'm by no means anti-exchange but if I were a CIO and was ordered to
cut cost Google would be something to seriously consider.

-----------------------------
Paul Wochnick
IT Manager
KPBS
(619) 594-0792
5200 Campanile Drive
San Diego, CA  92182-5400
www.kpbs.org


On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Raleigh <raleigh at cwsl.edu> wrote:
> We have no intention of outsourcing our email system. I suspect that many email system admins and security admins would never consider this because, quite simply, your organization's confidential mailbox data is floating around out there somewhere in Google's storage cloud. That's fine for my personal email (I use Gmail for that), but not for confidential corporate email.
>
> The Gmail web interface is fine as far as webmail goes, but it doesn't compare well, feature to feature, with Outlook. It simply can't. It's a web interface.
>
> I've been an Exchange admin for quite some time, and I find Exchange to be a very solid product in Microsoft's lineup. It has been extremely reliable, and highly integrated with AD. Exchange is extremely popular in corporate America (~80% market share) not because admins *have* to run Exchange, but because they *choose* to run Exchange. Of all the things on our network that I would consider outsourcing or using a non-MS product, our email system is the least of them. Outlook/Exchange are a solid combination. Each version has been an improvement on the previous one. I will not hesitate to upgrade our system to Exchange 2010.
>
> This is the first time that I've heard someone refer to Exchange as a "mess", and I'd be curious to hear what administrative experiences they've had with Exchange to give it such a label.
>
> --Raleigh
>
>
>
> Raleigh Moody
> Network Engineer, MCSE
> Associate Director of Information Technology
> California Western School of Law
> San Diego, CA | 619-525-1406 | ram at cwsl.edu
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sdw2003-bounces at mattware.com [mailto:sdw2003-bounces at mattware.com] On Behalf Of Tracy Reed
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 3:27 PM
> To: San Diego Windows 2003 User Group
> Subject: Re: [sdw2003] L.A. votes to "Go Google"; pressure shifts to Googleand the cloud
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 03:09:09PM -0700, Thaddeus Braun spake thusly:
>> Any thoughts on this? Anyone already "clouding" their email offsite for
>> a whole company of 50+ people?
>
> Many universities have already done this successfuly (so far):
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=gmail+university+email
>
> They say it is cheaper than running a campus email system. I'm not
> sure how I would feel about it for my company. But I'm all in favor of
> anything that unseats that mess that is Exchange. If I get one more
> "so-and-so would like to recall the email they just sent" message I'm
> gonna go nuts. :)
>
> PS: This list is the only one of the 118 mailing lists which I
> subscribe to (but obviously don't read on a daily basis) which
> flat-out rejects attachments of any sort including GPG
> signatures. Pretty much every email you have ever seen me post here
> had to be sent twice: once with the GPG signature attachment which got
> rejected because I always forget to tell my MUA not to sign and then
> once again without the GPG signature. I like to think this implies
> something about the email security mindsets of the different
> communities in which I participate. :)
>
> --
> Tracy Reed
> http://tracyreed.org
> _______________________________________________
> sdw2003 mailing list
> sdw2003 at mattware.com
> http://lists.mattware.com/mailman/listinfo/sdw2003
> _______________________________________________
> sdw2003 mailing list
> sdw2003 at mattware.com
> http://lists.mattware.com/mailman/listinfo/sdw2003
>
_______________________________________________
sdw2003 mailing list
sdw2003 at mattware.com
http://lists.mattware.com/mailman/listinfo/sdw2003