[clug] Interesting article
david at tulloh.id.au
Mon Jan 5 08:49:21 GMT 2009
Michael James wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:13:02 pm jm wrote:
>> I would say that the article contains too many blanket statments. You
>> can out source IT, but you should do so only if;
>> * IT is NOT strategically important
>> * You are happy to trust thrird parties with you valuable data
>> * It is cheaper to get the required services from a third party than to
>> DIY * You can select and manage the third party to obtain the desired
>> level of service at the desired cost
> Commodity "dial tone" services offer better quality, performance
> and capability that anything the traditional legacy players can supply,
> and make in-house provision of these services economically laughable.
> eg: Gmail gives a much better service (on any metric)
> than the thousands of corporate exchange servers,
> that are so expensively mismanaged.
> So many "totally unique" buisness situations
> only differ in the legacy that ?must? be accomodated.
Gmail doesn't provide security. That's a deal killer for a lot of
groups right there. A government department of sizeable international
corporation isn't going to be happy putting all their sensitive email
traffic on US servers.
At my company we (mis)use email to transfer files between people, often
5+MB to multiple people. This isn't a significant issue over a network,
just wastes some HD space. If that was all going out over the company
ADSL pipe it just wouldn't work.
There's a bunch of reasons why people wouldn't want Gmail, I personally
just hate the feel of web 'applications' so I'll always choose a client
app over a similarly featured webpage.
More information about the linux