Boston Dumps M$ Despite the Anti-Google FUD-slinging

“It will cost Boston around $800,000 to move over to Gmail, Google Docs for word processing, and Google’s cloud service for storing documents. But by dropping some Microsoft products, the city government will save at least $280,000 a year.”
see Boston dumps Microsoft Exchange for Google Apps

It sounds like “search” all over again. M$ spends hundreds of millions spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about Google and people still love the value they get from Google. The negatives of using M$’s 365 “solution” solve nothing but how to keep M$’s cash-cow delivering. Having to install local applications just to access the cloud is just plain silly. M$ had better decide whether to stand on the boat or the dock because the boat is leaving. Users get nothing from supporting M$’s desktop monopoly, office suite and then paying more for the cloud… The whole idea of the cloud is to cut cost and complexity. M$ is increasing both.

“We had been using Microsoft Exchange for more than 14 years and it was starting to outlive its usefulness. Tools that we relied on in Exchange 2007 didn’t work when we upgraded to the 2010 version, calendaring was messy and mobile syncing was even tougher. Our Sharepoint server – the center of collaboration for the company – was just not working.

Our search for a cloud-based email and collaboration system came down to Microsoft Office 365 and Google Apps. While our 1,200 employees were used to Microsoft’s tools, we weren’t convinced their solution fully understood the cloud; Office 365 still required us to install software and hardware. Google Apps was entirely cloud-based and offered everything we needed with a single license – it was the right way to go for us.”

That’s a quote from a long time customer. Did you hear that, M$? That’s the sound of the door closing in your face and true openness in IT taking the place of needless complexity and cost.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Boston Dumps M$ Despite the Anti-Google FUD-slinging

  1. oiaohm wrote, “bw the biggest saving with FOSS is extended hardware life cycles.”

    That’s a big one but malware must be of similar magnitude. Malware makes so many PCs sluggish or unbootable or dangerous and it’s impossible to stop on that other OS. Some organizations budget ~$1k per annum per PC for management whereas it’s more like ~$100 for GNU/Linux, perhaps less with thin clients. With GNU/Linux a whole network behaves as a single PC. One school division switched years ago and tripled the number of PCs but the IT staff went from wearing out shoes to sitting around and planning stuff. M$’s whole plan is to get the world working for them including IT staff. That makes them loyal followers whose jobs depend on M$…

  2. oiaohm says:

    bw the biggest saving with FOSS is extended hardware life cycles.

  3. matchrocket says:

    Watch, Boston will be just one of the first big American cities to ditch Microsoft. This is the end. Face it trolls. You are looking at the end of Microsoft’s rule.

  4. bw says:

    I got to wondering about how others do after posting that. I looked up Microsoft’s numbers and they are around $800K per employee in terms of revenues. They are doing a lot better than we are. Damn!

  5. bw says:

    “$700. That’s not small. ”

    for 50 years? I would argue that it is pretty small. At our place, if you divide our revenues by the total number of employees in the place, it comes to over $500,000 per year. $14 is pretty insignificant and would not get much management attention if any.

    Now Boston is not a business and they could maybe use that aggregate $280K to re-do the mayor’s office or pay for a fact-finding trip to Paris to see how they do parade security, but I bet that it is a very small piece off their annual pie, too.

  6. bw wrote of money squandered on M$, “Seems like kind of a small potato.”

    Well, for a year or two it is, but the savings on using GNU/Linux go on forever, not just a year or two. Do the maths. What’s $14 X 50 years? $700. That’s not small. Extend the savings by keeping hardware twice as long and it’s huge. As long as M$’s system is anchored on that other OS and a desktop client, it will have an extremely high cost in comparison to other alternatives. People forget that while change to GNU/Linux, FLOSS and Google’s cloud takes some effort, they have to waste that effort repeatedly with M$ every few years forever. It adds up.

    M$ has not charged ten times what it does for its OS simply because that would wake more people up sooner, but no matter what the licensing fee is, forcing hardware upgrades along with new software is a killer. PCs are now kept twice as long as previously simply because people are not plodding along the Wintel treadmill.

  7. bw says:

    “long time customer”

    You are such a fan of “doing the maths” that I am surprised you didn’t do them here. The key figures, $800,000 to convert and $280,000 per year savings, when divided by the 20,000 employees said to be affected are rather miniscule, namely $40 bucks each to switch to save $14 bucks a year. I bet the mayor spends a lot more than that on lunch every day and likely more than the changeover costs on limo service to take him home each night.

    Seems like kind of a small potato.

  8. George Wilson wrote, “Are FLOSS groupware solutions so much worse than Exchange?”

    The whole idea of the cloud is to lift the responsibility for hardware and software from the local staff to experts at a remote location. FLOSS gives an advantage in cost of software and maintenance locally but very few businesses can install and staff servers more cheaply than Google. The ultimate small, cheap, and reliable computer is one out there on the Internet maintained by someone else. It takes up no space locally and requires a lot less maintenance locally, just what organizations and individuals need.

  9. oiaohm wrote, “Citadel has multi location support vastly better than Exchange. Its interface is kinda horrid.”

    Yes, it’s a throwback to the “bulletin-board” era of the Internet but it is FLOSS. Anyone can examine and modify it so it’s useful as a starting point for new products.

  10. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson there are quite a few FLOSS groupwares that give Exchange run for money.

    http://www.sogo.nu/english.html Sogo is quite nice. You can even keep on using outlook.

    Citadel has multi location support vastly better than Exchange. Its interface is kinda horrid.

    Part of the problem here George Wilson is people like you who don’t know the good looking FLOSS solutions. There are quite a few good looking replacements to exchange.

    Other half we need web based Libreoffice to complete the set off.

  11. George Wilson says:

    George Wilson asks: why aren’t they switching to Linux? George Wilson thinks a FLOSS groupware solution (e.g. Citadel) would have to be much cheaper to set up. Yet they are carrying their money to Google? Why? Are FLOSS groupware solutions so much worse than Exchange?

Leave a Reply