Microsoft Offers 10 Reasons Why Enterprises Shouldn't Use Google Apps

Last weekend I went shopping for some new duds for the trip to SF next week and on the counter near the register was a sign that had some notes about offering the store credit card on every purchase and a list of "10 objection overcomers". Today, Richard has a good overview of Microsoft's "10 Reasons Why Enterprises Shouldn't Use Google Apps". Check out his analysis first, then pop back to CN for mine.

1. Google touts having enterprise level customers but how many “USERS” of their applications truly exist within the enterprise?

The number of enterprise level customers using Google Apps (GAPE) rises daily. Why? Simple, because their apps are growing in presence outside of the enterprise. And as that number increases, the training needs decrease.

2. Google has a history of releasing incomplete products, calling them beta software, and issuing updates on a "known only to Google" schedule – this flies in the face of what enterprises want and need in their technology partners – what is Google doing that indicates they are in lock step with customer needs?

This is a great point in that CIOs want assurance that the company will stand behind their products. Microsoft has layers of support for their products, but you pay for it either in the product or in the support cost.

3. Google touts the low cost of their apps –not only price but the absence of need for hardware, storage or maintenance for Google Apps. BUT if GAPE is indeed a complement to MSFT Office, the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain. Doesn’t this result in increased complexity and increased costs?

The complement period I would assume is short. Running both systems wouldn't make financial sense. Add GAPE, run in parallel, then set a sunset schedule for MSFT Office.

4. Google’s primary focus is on ad funded search. Their enterprise focus and now apps exist on the very fringe and in combination with other fringe services only account for 1% of the company’s revenue. What happens if Google executes poorly? Do they shut down given it will them in a minimal and short term way? Should customers trust that this won’t happen?

Believe me, Google is moving into Enterprise because they need to shift the balance sheet away from ad-only revenue. For anyone who understands accounting or finances, this point would be moot.

5. Google’s apps only work if an enterprise has no power users, employees are always online, enterprises haven’t built custom Office apps – doesn’t this equal a very small % of global information workers today? –On a feature comparison basis, it’s not surprising that Microsoft has a huge lead.

Hmm, I am not sure I completely understand this point, but what about using the public Internet to transfer non-confidential files worldwide as a cost savings on top of using GAPE? And coming from a company with 55,000 employees, I can tell you that Google Docs would suffice for at least 80% of users day 1.

6. Google apps don’t have essential document creation features like support for headers, footers, tables of content, footnotes, etc. Additionally, while customers can collaborate on basic docs without the above noted features, to collaborate on detailed docs, a company must implement a two part process – work together on the basic doc, save it to Word or Excel and then send via email for final edits. Yes they have a $50 price tag, but with the inefficiencies created by just this one cycle, how much do GAPE really cost – and can you afford the fidelity loss?

Fair point. But again, how many users is this really?

7. Enterprise companies have to constantly think about government regulations and standards – while Google can store a lot of data for enterprises on Google servers, there is no easy to use, automated way for enterprises to regularly delete data, issue a legal hold for specific docs or bring copies into the corp. What happens if a company needs to respond to government regulations bodies? Google touts 99.9% uptime for their apps but what few people realize that promise is for Gmail only. Equally alarming is the definition Google has for "downtime" – ten consecutive minutes of downtime. What happens if throughout the day Google is down 7 minutes each hour? What does 7 minutes each hour for a full work day that cost an enterprise?

What about when Word crashes because of an update to another application? I can't answer to government regulations part. Downtime with any app is a possibility, even with inhouse apps.

8. In the world of business, it is always on and always connected. As such, having access to technical support 24/7 is essential. If a company deploys Google Apps and there is a technical issue at 8pm PST, Sorry. Google's tech support is open M-F 1AM-6PM PST – are these the new hours of global business? And if a customer’s "designated administrator" is not available (a requirement) does business just stop?

Great point.

9. Google says that enterprise customers use only 10% of the features in today’s productivity applications which implies that EVERYONE needs the SAME 10% of the feature when in fact it is very clear that in each company there are specific roles people play that demands access to specific information – how does Google’s generic strategy address role specific needs?

Great point.

10. With Google apps in perpetual beta and Google controlling when and if they rollout specific features and functionality, customers have minimal if any control over the timing of product rollouts and features – how do 1) I know how to strategically plan and train and 2) get the features and functionality I have specifically requested? How much money does not knowing cost?

True, but MSFT Office is always technically in a move forward stage as well. When one version of Office releases, the next is already in beta. And with the Internet connectivity of GAPE, the apps would always remain current, something that doesn't happen with Office.

Richard ends with, "There's no doubt these are compelling reasons why an enterprise should choose Microsoft Office over Google Apps, at this point. But it's noticeable that the list doesn't mention the word "collaboration", which is probably the key benefit of Google Apps compared to MS Office." While I am not sure they are compelling, Richard is right by saying "at this point".

The one point that this email forgets to discuss is how to overcome the objection of cost. For a CIO, reducing costs is typically part of the bonus package. This is a way to do just that. For example, how many employees really need Excel or Powerpoint, yet they sit on the desktop at $xxx cost. Moving to GAPE, even as a complement could save a company money and thereby potentially save headcount.

This is the same battle with almost any buy vs. build or buy vs. ASP model discussion.