Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise - Linux

This is a discussion on Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise - Linux ; http://weblog.infoworld.com/daily/ar..._apps_roa.html Google Apps' road to enterprises fraught with pitfalls July 02, 2008 InfoWorld's Tom Kaneshige takes an in-depth look at Google and its collision course with Microsoft in the cloud, and concludes Google Apps will be hard pressed to dislodge ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise

  1. Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise


    http://weblog.infoworld.com/daily/ar..._apps_roa.html



    Google Apps' road to enterprises fraught with pitfalls
    July 02, 2008

    InfoWorld's Tom Kaneshige takes an in-depth look at Google and its collision
    course with Microsoft in the cloud, and concludes Google Apps will be hard
    pressed to dislodge Microsoft Office.

    "Google Apps is a bunch of free software with very limited functionality
    hosted at Google's datacenters and accessible over the Internet"

    "I don't think anybody is going to confuse Google Apps with Microsoft
    Office"

    It seems not only is Google Apps not ready, but companies aren't either.
    "Although Google Apps may carve out niches," Kaneshige writes, "it's
    unlikely that basic applications in the cloud will play a major role in the
    way giants of industry conduct business. Imagine sensitive business
    documents being shared in the cloud without comprehensive enterprise
    controls."




    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  2. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise

    Ezekiel wrote:
    > "Imagine sensitive business
    > documents being shared in the cloud without comprehensive enterprise
    > controls."



    This is the most sensible quote thats been here for ages.

    There is no way that web2 or the cloud or whatever its called is ever
    going to replace the desktop in large business circles.

  3. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise


    "Phil Da Lick!" wrote in
    message news:UJ-dnY-VR4SHBfbVnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@posted.plusnet...
    > Ezekiel wrote:
    >> "Imagine sensitive business documents being shared in the cloud without
    >> comprehensive enterprise controls."

    >
    >
    > This is the most sensible quote thats been here for ages.
    >
    > There is no way that web2 or the cloud or whatever its called is ever
    > going to replace the desktop in large business circles.


    It's a very real concern that seems to be overlooked. There are some
    benefits to online apps (clouds, web2, whatever the latest buzzword is) and
    I know a few people who use them to share a calendar with their friends or
    whatever. But when it comes to businesses using them it's a whole different
    ballgame.

    Just one simple hypothetical examples. Pfizer or Genentech spends a billion
    dollars developing a new drug. There is no way, no how they are going to
    trust Google (or anyone else) to generate the spreadsheets and documents for
    the results of their clinical trials.

    Apply the same concerns to any company in any business sector and the same
    issues come up. There's no way that businesses, government agencies,
    lawyers, financial firms or anyone else is going to trust Google (or anyone)
    with their internal documents and knowledge.

    Not to be sinister but let's be realistic. Some of this stuff can be
    damaging to companies and if it accidentally (or not so accidentally) was
    leaked or showed up on the web then it could be serious trouble. I have a
    brother in law who's a partner at a law firm in NY. Long ago he told me
    something somewhat funny that went something like: "Never write when you can
    speak. Never speak when you can nod and never nod when you can wink." (ie -
    Don't leave a trail if you don't have to.)









    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  4. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise

    Ezekiel wrote:
    > "Phil Da Lick!" wrote in
    > message news:UJ-dnY-VR4SHBfbVnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@posted.plusnet...
    >> Ezekiel wrote:
    >>> "Imagine sensitive business documents being shared in the cloud without
    >>> comprehensive enterprise controls."

    >>
    >> This is the most sensible quote thats been here for ages.
    >>
    >> There is no way that web2 or the cloud or whatever its called is ever
    >> going to replace the desktop in large business circles.

    >
    > It's a very real concern that seems to be overlooked. There are some
    > benefits to online apps (clouds, web2, whatever the latest buzzword is) and
    > I know a few people who use them to share a calendar with their friends or
    > whatever. But when it comes to businesses using them it's a whole different
    > ballgame.
    >
    > Just one simple hypothetical examples. Pfizer or Genentech spends a billion
    > dollars developing a new drug. There is no way, no how they are going to
    > trust Google (or anyone else) to generate the spreadsheets and documents for
    > the results of their clinical trials.
    >
    > Apply the same concerns to any company in any business sector and the same
    > issues come up. There's no way that businesses, government agencies,
    > lawyers, financial firms or anyone else is going to trust Google (or anyone)
    > with their internal documents and knowledge.
    >
    > Not to be sinister but let's be realistic. Some of this stuff can be
    > damaging to companies and if it accidentally (or not so accidentally) was
    > leaked or showed up on the web then it could be serious trouble. I have a
    > brother in law who's a partner at a law firm in NY. Long ago he told me
    > something somewhat funny that went something like: "Never write when you can
    > speak. Never speak when you can nod and never nod when you can wink." (ie -
    > Don't leave a trail if you don't have to.)



    Besides which the benefits of client/server have been known for decades.
    Its gone about as far as it will go into certain areas.

    Yeah, there are some interesting concepts involved in the whole cloud
    thing but no way is it going to become the predominant platform. Home
    users will not accept pay-as-you-go software and business users will not
    allow the kind of intrusion it allows. Hell, some companies we deal with
    have whole networks offline with no plans to take them online. At all.

    I think some of our customers are quite happily still running win98. It
    works, it does the job why change it? And taking responsibility/control
    and distributing it out into the cloud? Forget it...

    Imagine a mission critical business platform that uses components from
    all over the cloud called remotely and it suddenly stops one day. For no
    apparent reason. Hands up if you'd want to be the IT guy whose job it is
    to figure that one out.

  5. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise


    "Phil Da Lick!" wrote in
    message news:VpednYU4MoIFPPbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusn et...
    > Ezekiel wrote:
    >> "Phil Da Lick!" wrote in
    >> message news:UJ-dnY-VR4SHBfbVnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@posted.plusnet...
    >>> Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>> "Imagine sensitive business documents being shared in the cloud without
    >>>> comprehensive enterprise controls."
    >>>
    >>> This is the most sensible quote thats been here for ages.
    >>>
    >>> There is no way that web2 or the cloud or whatever its called is ever
    >>> going to replace the desktop in large business circles.

    >>
    >> It's a very real concern that seems to be overlooked. There are some
    >> benefits to online apps (clouds, web2, whatever the latest buzzword is)
    >> and I know a few people who use them to share a calendar with their
    >> friends or whatever. But when it comes to businesses using them it's a
    >> whole different ballgame.
    >>
    >> Just one simple hypothetical examples. Pfizer or Genentech spends a
    >> billion dollars developing a new drug. There is no way, no how they are
    >> going to trust Google (or anyone else) to generate the spreadsheets and
    >> documents for the results of their clinical trials.
    >>
    >> Apply the same concerns to any company in any business sector and the
    >> same issues come up. There's no way that businesses, government agencies,
    >> lawyers, financial firms or anyone else is going to trust Google (or
    >> anyone) with their internal documents and knowledge.
    >>
    >> Not to be sinister but let's be realistic. Some of this stuff can be
    >> damaging to companies and if it accidentally (or not so accidentally) was
    >> leaked or showed up on the web then it could be serious trouble. I have a
    >> brother in law who's a partner at a law firm in NY. Long ago he told me
    >> something somewhat funny that went something like: "Never write when you
    >> can speak. Never speak when you can nod and never nod when you can wink."
    >> (ie - Don't leave a trail if you don't have to.)

    >
    >
    > Besides which the benefits of client/server have been known for decades.
    > Its gone about as far as it will go into certain areas.


    The client/server app that most of us here are subjegated to (I mean "use")
    is Lotus Notes. Primarily for email but we have some cheesy Notes apps that
    we paid some consulting firm to write for us. Since everything is stored on
    the server (and replicated locally) it provides central control and
    management but if client/server word processors and spreadsheets are
    anything like Notes then count me out!


    > Yeah, there are some interesting concepts involved in the whole cloud
    > thing but no way is it going to become the predominant platform. Home
    > users will not accept pay-as-you-go software and business users will not
    > allow the kind of intrusion it allows. Hell, some companies we deal with
    > have whole networks offline with no plans to take them online. At all.


    I'm one of those people that don't like the "Pay as you go" approach. I'd
    rather pay for something once and get it done and over with. Even if it's
    cheap (as in a couple of dollars/month) it adds up over time and regular
    payments are too inconvenient.


    > I think some of our customers are quite happily still running win98. It
    > works, it does the job why change it? And taking responsibility/control
    > and distributing it out into the cloud? Forget it...


    One of our large customers (I can't name them but they're the biggest
    retailer in the US). They have a reputation for being cheap/frugal and they
    still run NT 4 on a lot of their desktops. They keep asking us to support
    their OS with our product.


    > Imagine a mission critical business platform that uses components from all
    > over the cloud called remotely and it suddenly stops one day. For no
    > apparent reason. Hands up if you'd want to be the IT guy whose job it is
    > to figure that one out.


    There's the case you mention but there is also the scenario where some
    mission critical system is built using multiple technologies that exist
    remotely out there somewhere in the cloud. One of those "cloud thingies"
    gets upgraded and now your system is down. After a while IT figures it out
    and gets things working again only to have another one of the "cloud
    thingies" get updated with a new version or bug fix only to have the system
    go down again. It's too many points of failure with software that you don't
    control.

    Internally when we roll out a new system or version we get to control when
    the software gets rolled out and we get to test it in-house first. Hopefully
    things will go smoothly but even then problems come up. And that's with us
    having full control over everything. It takes a *lot* of trust to build
    systems using this cloud technology and I don't see that happening anytime
    soon.




    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  6. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise

    On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:00:43 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Ezekiel wrote:
    >> "Imagine sensitive business
    >> documents being shared in the cloud without comprehensive enterprise
    >> controls."

    >
    >
    > This is the most sensible quote thats been here for ages.
    >
    > There is no way that web2 or the cloud or whatever its called is ever
    > going to replace the desktop in large business circles.


    I agree with you Phil.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  7. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise

    On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:41:13 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Ezekiel wrote:
    >> "Phil Da Lick!" wrote in
    >> message news:UJ-dnY-VR4SHBfbVnZ2dnUVZ8uednZ2d@posted.plusnet...
    >>> Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>> "Imagine sensitive business documents being shared in the cloud without
    >>>> comprehensive enterprise controls."
    >>>
    >>> This is the most sensible quote thats been here for ages.
    >>>
    >>> There is no way that web2 or the cloud or whatever its called is ever
    >>> going to replace the desktop in large business circles.

    >>
    >> It's a very real concern that seems to be overlooked. There are some
    >> benefits to online apps (clouds, web2, whatever the latest buzzword is) and
    >> I know a few people who use them to share a calendar with their friends or
    >> whatever. But when it comes to businesses using them it's a whole different
    >> ballgame.
    >>
    >> Just one simple hypothetical examples. Pfizer or Genentech spends a billion
    >> dollars developing a new drug. There is no way, no how they are going to
    >> trust Google (or anyone else) to generate the spreadsheets and documents for
    >> the results of their clinical trials.
    >>
    >> Apply the same concerns to any company in any business sector and the same
    >> issues come up. There's no way that businesses, government agencies,
    >> lawyers, financial firms or anyone else is going to trust Google (or anyone)
    >> with their internal documents and knowledge.
    >>
    >> Not to be sinister but let's be realistic. Some of this stuff can be
    >> damaging to companies and if it accidentally (or not so accidentally) was
    >> leaked or showed up on the web then it could be serious trouble. I have a
    >> brother in law who's a partner at a law firm in NY. Long ago he told me
    >> something somewhat funny that went something like: "Never write when you can
    >> speak. Never speak when you can nod and never nod when you can wink." (ie -
    >> Don't leave a trail if you don't have to.)

    >
    >
    > Besides which the benefits of client/server have been known for decades.
    > Its gone about as far as it will go into certain areas.
    >
    > Yeah, there are some interesting concepts involved in the whole cloud
    > thing but no way is it going to become the predominant platform. Home
    > users will not accept pay-as-you-go software and business users will not
    > allow the kind of intrusion it allows. Hell, some companies we deal with
    > have whole networks offline with no plans to take them online. At all.
    >
    > I think some of our customers are quite happily still running win98. It
    > works, it does the job why change it? And taking responsibility/control
    > and distributing it out into the cloud? Forget it...
    >
    > Imagine a mission critical business platform that uses components from
    > all over the cloud called remotely and it suddenly stops one day. For no
    > apparent reason. Hands up if you'd want to be the IT guy whose job it is
    > to figure that one out.


    BTW I no longer believe you are a High Plains Thumper nym.....
    Sorry for accusing you.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  8. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise

    On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:41:13 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:

    > Home
    > users will not accept pay-as-you-go software and business users will not
    > allow the kind of intrusion it allows.



    It's not pay-as-you go but advertisement based.



    -Thufir

  9. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise


    "thufir" wrote in message
    news:wXSak.52052$Jx.869@pd7urf1no...
    > On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:41:13 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >
    >> Home
    >> users will not accept pay-as-you-go software and business users will not
    >> allow the kind of intrusion it allows.

    >
    >
    > It's not pay-as-you go but advertisement based.


    That's even worse as far as I'm concerned. I'm advertised to death already
    as it is. The last thing I want is to put up with stupid web advertising
    when I'm trying to get some work done. Either give me a *free* product or
    let me buy it outright. Just spare me the never ending advertisements.



    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  10. Re: Google (on-line) Apps - definitely NOT ready for the enterprise

    Ezekiel wrote:
    > "thufir" wrote in message
    > news:wXSak.52052$Jx.869@pd7urf1no...
    >> On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:41:13 +0100, Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >>
    >>> Home
    >>> users will not accept pay-as-you-go software and business users will not
    >>> allow the kind of intrusion it allows.

    >>
    >> It's not pay-as-you go but advertisement based.

    >
    > That's even worse as far as I'm concerned. I'm advertised to death already
    > as it is. The last thing I want is to put up with stupid web advertising
    > when I'm trying to get some work done. Either give me a *free* product or
    > let me buy it outright. Just spare me the never ending advertisements.



    I agree with this.

    Also, it may *start* advertisement based but everyone knows what the
    eventual goal is. Sweater Boy's been on about pay-as-you-go software for
    years now.

+ Reply to Thread