An Interesting Discussion about Exchange vs Google Apps

Back in May, I posted Google Apps vs Exchange Part I that included a link to a comparison presentation. There have been some recent comments and an interesting discussion about the post and the presentation.

To save you searching back in time, you can click here to see the original post and the comments.

As always, your thoughts are welcome.

Cost Savings versus Sustainability?

A recent article in Mass High Tech lamented that "Company cost savings still trump cleantech, alternative energy".

The assumption that cleantech and cost savings are mutually exclusive, however, is flawed.

Cloud computing lowers carbon footprint and, in most cases, offers significant cost savings. Furthermore, cloud-based solutions shift IT spending from capital expenditures to operating expense.

To see how cloud based solutions, such as Google Apps, compare with in-house solutions, such as Exchange, click here and here.

Google Apps vs Exchange Part 3: Outlook Sync Compatibility

By now, you have heard about Google Apps Sync for Microsoft Outlook. You may also hear rumblings about less than 100% compatibility.

Yes, there are limitations. That said, the ability to use Outlook with Google Apps Premier Edition is an easy, powerful way to help companies transition from Exchange services (in-house or hosted) to Google Apps.

So you know .... the tool does not sync:

• Tasks (a shame since Google Tasks integrate with the inbox and calendar so well)
• Notes
• Journal
• Public Folders

Additionally, installing Google Apps Sync for Microsoft Outlook may change the way searching works within Outlook. According to Microsoft, it disables Outlook's use of Windows Desktop Search, which Outlook uses to "any and all Outlook data".

While the registry bit was not changed by the Google sync tool installation on any of our systems, here is the fix.

1. Run REGEDIT
   
   
2. Browse to: "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Windows Search"
   
   
3. Reset the value of “PreventIndexingOutlook” to “0” (without the quotes). To do this, right click on the “PreventIndexingOutlook” key, select “Modify…”, then change the value data to “0”.
   
   
4. Exit REGEDIT

Finally, Google is publishing a list of other Outlook Add-ins that may not be compatible with the sync tool. We are reviewing the information and will post an update later this week.

While some companies may find one or more of these limitations a "show stopper", our experience tells us that most companies will still benefit from being able to use Outlook and Google Apps via the MAPI connection.

Google Apps vs Exchange In-House

Functionality, cost, and user experience all play into the decision to run Google Apps versus Exchange in-house.

Our latest take ... we've added "the user experience" as our 8th consideration. With the addition of Outlook Sync for Google Apps, users can maintain their current client and services and have access to the additional features offered by Google Apps Premier Edition.

See the presentation here.

Google Apps vs. Exchange - Part 2

Until yesterday, Part 2 of the comparison was going to look at some of the more esoteric feature comparison between Google Apps and Exchange. Specifically, I was going to cover how Google Apps new Tasks features integrate with email and calendar functions in comparison to isolated manner in which Tasks function in Exchange/Outlook (separate reminders, separate date tracking).

Today's announcement by Google of a MAPI-based Outlook Synchronization solution, however, changes the focus completely.

With this capability, Outlook users can continue to use Outlook without the limitations of running as an IMAP client.

Click Here for Google's Announcement and to Learn More.

We'll be testing the add-on over the next week or so and I will post our findings as well.

Google Apps vs. Exchange -- Part 1

Over the past several weeks, the Horizon team has received more questions about the comparison between MS Exchange and Google Apps as a communication and collaboration platform.

Here is a presentation that compares MS Exchange and Google Apps in terms of investment, management, and administration.

There are also many user features in Google Apps that our former Exchange/Outlook users really love. I will share some of these in upcoming posts.

Objective View of Google vs. Microsoft

Twinstrata, the company that sells Clarity AP (assessment and planning) software, conducted a comprehensive study of the costs and risks of Google Apps versus Microsoft Exchange. In his Storage Bits blog, Robin Harris provides a good summary of the results.

Robin's summary explains the stark cost difference -- 20x on capital equipment and 5x to 6x on a 3 year total cost of ownership (TCO). Some of the details warrant clarification.

First, the study narrowed the gap based on the risk of unplanned downtime. MS Exchange, however, requires downtime on a monthly basis (or expensive redundancy configurations), for system and operating system patches and updates. Planned downtime adds to the cost and should be counted when comparing availability given that Google is engineered for zero-downtime.

Second, Google is developing a robust and diverse channel to provide the implementation, migration, integration, and support services identified is lacking in the study. While purchasing through a reseller increases the cost over the direct Google pricing, the value of the services improves the quality, and therefore lowers the cost, of using Google.

While these considerations may change the equation slightly, the business case for Google Apps is valid for many small and mid-size businesses.

Understanding SaaS Availability Claims

As small and mid-size businesses (SMBs) evaluate cloud computing solutions, vendors often tout availability, or up-time, commitments. Understanding the metric, and how to compare vendor claims, is critical when selecting a solution.

Availability is generally expressed as a percentage -- 99.9%, 99.99%, and so on. With 8760 hours in each year, 99.9% availability equates to 8.75 hours (0.1%) downtime each year, or an average of 45 minutes per month. Similarly, 99.99% availability equates to 45 minutes of downtime each year, or about 5 minutes per month.

Simple yes, but the devil is in the details. Most vendors caveat availability commitments by excluding schedule maintenance windows. For some vendors, this means regularly scheduled windows; for others this means any non-emergency maintenance activities with advanced notice.

When comparing availability claims, you need to account how availability is calculated.

For example, Google Apps has no scheduled maintenance windows. The Google cloud is designed to allow maintenance and updates without impacting user access to applications and data. Google's 99.9% availability commitment means less than 8.75 total hours of downtime each year. In comparison, Company X running MS Exchange 2003 recently claimed availability of 99.99% as they had no unscheduled downtime in over a year. Looking more closely, they shutdown their email servers for about an hour each week to apply Microsoft security patches, install software updates, and run deep malware scans on the server.

Company X has total downtime of 52 hours per year. In a fair comparison, user availability is only 99.4%.

One of the advantages of Software-as-a-Service solutions, like Google Apps, is that SaaS solutions are design to provide better availability while reducing system administration and support costs. For Company X, moving to Google Apps would reduce the amount of time spent maintaining and supporting their email service -- saving money and letting their IT staff focus on activities with greater benefit to the business.

Maybe Microsoft Does See Google as a Threat in the Cloud

While Steve Ballmer failed to mention Google Apps as a threat to Microsoft's email and collaboration products and services during a recent strategy meeting, the corporate VP of Microsoft Online Services sounds like he is fighting a street brawl.

Phil Wainewright provides the blow-by-blow in is blog, Microsoft pumps cloud, trumps Google with GSK.

What are your thoughts?

If Microsoft Resellers Don't Like Licensing Options ...

If Microsoft's resellers don't like the licensing options available to small and mid-size businesses (SMB's), why should you?

Yesterday, ChannelWeb (A CMP Publication) reported that Microsoft was mulling over changes to its SMB volume licensing programs, again. This is just another salvo in the ongoing debate over licensing complexity championed by David Schrag and other SMB experts for years.

Microsoft Licensing is overly complex. For every server, there are Client Access Licenses (CALs) to be bought. Volume licensing gets you access to features, training, and a limited number of support calls. Tracking and managing licensing and its related benefits burdens your IT staff with more administration.

Why bother?

For many applications and services, Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solutions meet your business requirements without the licensing hassle. Most SaaS solutions include a reasonable startup fee and annual per-user fees. While user fees for services like Salesforce.com have tiers based on functionality sets, others like Google Apps include all service and application options at a single fee.

Either way, the licensing is relatively simple, you pay as you go, and your IT staff do not need a MS in Licensing (pun intended!).

Incremental Improvements in Gmail Should Help Enterprise Adoption

Google Apps Enterprise Edition users have seen some a number of small changes to the user Gmail user interface. While some are cosmetic -- colors, borders, highlights -- others should ease user adoption and comfort with Gmail. One of these changes is the Move to button that appeared this morning.

One of the big differences between Gmail and other email servers, like Microsoft Exchange, is the difference between folders and labels. With folders, when you move an email from your Inbox to the folder, the email actually moves into that folder. To find the email, you need to browse the folder or include the folder in your search.

Gmail labels work differently. In Gmail, all of your email resides in "All Mail". Gmail uses the power of Google's search technology to find and display your messages.

When you label and Archive your message, you are removing it from the "Inbox" and adding the labels to the message. While clicking on a Label name looks like opening a folder, you are in effect searching for all messages with the Label.

Labels offer more than traditional folders in that: (1) You can put multiple labels on a message without having to copy the message into multiple folders; and (2) Searching and finding messages in Gmail is fast (no comparison to Outlook).

The Move to button adds the label and archives the message(s) in one click. As such, it looks and feels like you are moving a message into a folder.

User Interface enhancements that mask some of the differences between Gmail and other email systems will only enhance users' acceptance. With this feature, users can work with the familiar "move" concept without loosing Gmail's superior search capability.