4 ms·

You're missing the point. The problem is not that the service is free (especially since as a free service, Google's uptime probably leaves all their competitors

You're missing the point. The problem is not that the service is free (especially since as a free service, Google's uptime probably leaves all their competitors in the dust). The problem is just having your email stored outside your private network. It makes a lot of sense for startups and small companies, less so when they start growing and they can afford a staff of sysadmins.

sunchild 16y ago
This attitude drives me nuts. Why would anyone want a staff of sysadmins? You're almost certainly buying (at a high capital outlay) the B-team when you can rent the A-team for next to nothing. There's nothing magical about your "private network". These days corporate networks are chock full of holes and ripe with hypocritical security priorities. Use Google apps for business ($50/year/user). Hire one of the many companies that archive Google Apps data. It is total folly to think that you'll buy better security by paying for your own infrastructure and a small army to run it. That's like claiming the only safe automobile is one that you and your friends build.
- billmcneale 16y ago
  As I said in my comment, this is never going to fly for any company past a certain size. There is just too much confidential and legally sensitive stuff going through your email on a daily basis. Especially if you want to go public at some point (or even be acquired).
  - sunchild 16y ago
    As a lawyer, I respectfully scoff at this response. The exchange servers running the biggest companies in the world are sourced to third party providers. I love how people will put their "legally sensitive" stuff in the hands of a $60K/year sysadmin, but not in the hands of a multi-billion dollar infrastructure operations specialist that also happens to manage the world's best index of Internet content. I really struggle to follow the logic.

sunchild 16y ago

This attitude drives me nuts. Why would anyone want a staff of sysadmins? You're almost certainly buying (at a high capital outlay) the B-team when you can rent the A-team for next to nothing. There's nothing magical about your "private network". These days corporate networks are chock full of holes and ripe with hypocritical security priorities. Use Google apps for business ($50/year/user). Hire one of the many companies that archive Google Apps data. It is total folly to think that you'll buy better security by paying for your own infrastructure and a small army to run it. That's like claiming the only safe automobile is one that you and your friends build.

billmcneale 16y ago
As I said in my comment, this is never going to fly for any company past a certain size. There is just too much confidential and legally sensitive stuff going through your email on a daily basis. Especially if you want to go public at some point (or even be acquired).
- sunchild 16y ago
  As a lawyer, I respectfully scoff at this response. The exchange servers running the biggest companies in the world are sourced to third party providers. I love how people will put their "legally sensitive" stuff in the hands of a $60K/year sysadmin, but not in the hands of a multi-billion dollar infrastructure operations specialist that also happens to manage the world's best index of Internet content. I really struggle to follow the logic.