Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Google's Enterprise Software Too Cheap?

bits.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–16 of 16 posts

Re: Is Google's Enterprise Software Too Cheap?

#11

Post by misterbwong »

jcromartie wrote: post #7
ntoshev wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually the problem is that Google's apps are self-service, and this is not what enterprise customers are used to. Most startups discussed here don't have the option to provide the non-scallable phone support either, so it is a very relevant problem. Hiring 1000 people in a support center in India is a very un-googly thing to do, so I guess Google will keep the prices low and persist educating their customers to be…

"Actually the problem is that Google's apps are self-service, and this is not what enterprise customers are used to." Having worked with numerous "enterprise" packages in various capacities, I can assure you that most enterprise software vendors offer something that only barely qualifies as "support" anyway. The difference is that Google isn't lying about their level of support,

While I do agree that most enterprise software support offices are-let's be honest-crap, that fact doesn't negate the enterprise's need for software support. Companies desire that safety blanket and "having someone to blame" even if they are lying to themselves.

A friend higher up than me in business once told me that large corporations are in the business of managing risk. This is in stark contrast to a startup founder's penchant for taking them.

Re: Is Google's Enterprise Software Too Cheap?

#13

Post by apathy »

brlittle wrote: post #10
apathy wrote: post #4

The real problem is inertia. 'Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM', remember? It'll take a generation to get rid of the crap, but it will happen. The CIO at USC arranged a campus-wide rollout; more will follow. Once students (who then enter the workforce and, eventually, make decisions) decide that $free >> $discounted for Office, and things like a proper mail merge/track changes/export to Word are implemented, it's…

The flaw I see in that argument is that you have no guarantee of service. Some people (my employer) care about that, and some don't. I'm not saying it's insurmountable. I'm just saying that the idea of a Boeing or a General Motors converting to Gmail isn't going to come to fruition under the current model.

> The flaw I see in that argument is that you have no guarantee of service.

Oh god, not this shit again.

Look at any typical SLA and tell me you don't see a zillion loopholes for lawyers to wriggle around. There's never any real guarantee of service unless an ironclad SLA is hammered out, and I suspect that if Google gets traction with Gmail for Domains, they'll do it.

When I was at Google (2003-2004) we had something like 10 seconds of user-visible outage. That was before Gmail, but it was also with a staff of ~200 people and ~250K servers. I have every reason to believe that Google can still stomp the shit out of all contenders on uptime; they just need some incentive to do it for specific services.

(my $0.02 only; I don't work for Google anymore. In fact I doubt I could ever go back; it would be too depressing to see what's become of the bullpen atmosphere in ops. Even still -- Urs may be the best in the world at what he does.)

Re: Is Google's Enterprise Software Too Cheap?

#14

Post by brlittle »

apathy wrote: post #13
brlittle wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The flaw I see in that argument is that you have no guarantee of service. Some people (my employer) care about that, and some don't. I'm not saying it's insurmountable. I'm just saying that the idea of a Boeing or a General Motors converting to Gmail isn't going to come to fruition under the current model.

> The flaw I see in that argument is that you have no guarantee of service. Oh god, not this shit again. Look at any typical SLA and tell me you don't see a zillion loopholes for lawyers to wriggle around. There's never any real guarantee of service unless an ironclad SLA is hammered out, and I suspect that if Google gets traction with Gmail for Domains, they'll do it. When I was at Google (2003-2004) we had somethin…

Perhaps, in your hurry to condemn, you have misinterpreted.

When I can walk out the back door and speak directly to the head of the department in charge of our application programming team, or the guys running the servers, and so on, then I feel pretty good about guaranteed uptime. More importantly, I can blame someone when it fails.

Let's presume for a minute that my smallish enterprise was to move to Google Apps, and for some reason completely beyond the control of my people (Google failure, cable cut, whatever), the service goes out. Who do I blame?

You can call it "shit" if that makes you feel better about it. But it certainly doesn't cut any ice for me to walk into the President's office and say "But Google only had 10 seconds of outage in 2003-2004." I'm still fired. Imagine how much worse it would be for someone in a large installation.

When I control the gear, I control what I can and can't accomplish. Unless you can sell me on a serious guarantee of service and compelling functionality...no thanks.

Re: Is Google's Enterprise Software Too Cheap?

#16

Post by apathy »

brlittle wrote: post #14
apathy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The flaw I see in that argument is that you have no guarantee of service. Oh god, not this shit again. Look at any typical SLA and tell me you don't see a zillion loopholes for lawyers to wriggle around. There's never any real guarantee of service unless an ironclad SLA is hammered out, and I suspect that if Google gets traction with Gmail for Domains, they'll do it. When I was at Google (2003-2004) we had somethin…

Perhaps, in your hurry to condemn, you have misinterpreted. When I can walk out the back door and speak directly to the head of the department in charge of our application programming team, or the guys running the servers, and so on, then I feel pretty good about guaranteed uptime. More importantly, I can blame someone when it fails. Let's presume for a minute that my smallish enterprise was to move to Google Apps, a…

> When I control the gear,

Does Boeing outsource anything? Discuss.

Obviously if you can run everything in-house for cheaper than an organization can do it elsewhere, you should. Large numbers of businesses are discovering that's not the case, or their 10 seconds of downtime isn't actually consequential. (If it is, then having an in-house base of expertise is critical. But an SLA is not the same as an in-house ops department!)

Post reply on HN