Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Google Apps Premier Edition Launches

Posted by kdawson on Thu Feb 22, 2007 09:54 AM
from the en-garde-Office dept.
prostoalex writes "Google Apps is adding a premium offering: a custom 10-GB Gmail box, Google Calendar, GTalk instant messenger, Writely, Google Pages, Google Custom home page iGoogle and Google SpreadSheets for $50 a year per employee. The NYTimes provides some details on competitive pricing: 'By comparison, businesses pay on average about $225 a person annually for Office and Exchange,... in addition to the costs of in-house management, customer support and hardware, according to the market research firm Gartner.' Boston.com quotes an analyst for Nucleus Research on Google's ease-of-use: '"What we see in the Google Apps is a real focus on making them easy to use and intuitive," she said. "And that's something that Microsoft has been unable to do in all of its years with Office."' But the same analyst is bearish on Google Apps' shortcomings relative to the mature Microsoft desktop products: 'Right now Google's going to give companies a better ability to negotiate with Microsoft.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] IT: Google Apps Slow to Replace Competition 144 comments
ericatcw brings us a Computerworld article about how businesses are still hesitant to switch to Google Apps as an alternative to Microsoft Office. While a Google spokesman claims "millions of active users", only "several thousand organizations" have paid for the Premier service, which was launched earlier this year. From Computerworld: "'If we deploy it correctly, Google Docs can replace some [of] our Office apps -- but not all of them,' said Les Sease, IT director of Prudential Carolina Real Estate in North Charleston, South Carolina. Sease would like to switch everyone over completely to Google Apps. But first he would like to see better synchronization between Google Apps and mobile devices, shared online file storage similar to that of Apple Inc.'s .Mac, as well as a simple desktop publishing tool similar to Microsoft Publisher."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • obvious flaw? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tomstdenis (446163) <tomstdenis AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:00AM (#18108498) Homepage
    Needing to be connected to the web sucks for those who travel.

    Or am I the only one to have thought of that?

    Tom
    • Re:obvious flaw? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by peragrin (659227) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:07AM (#18108572)
      being able to access your data and apps anywhere is just as useful when your laptop gets stolen.

      In the en it is a mixed bag. Somethings will require local data. Other times i really miss having everything on the network. Finding a balance between the two will be the best bet.

      Besides a corporation or government who gives their employees data to take home is just asking for trouble. How much of ten's of thousands of customer personal data has been lost your way?

      I just am tired of waiting for corporations to stand up and upgrade their networks to even present standards. the USA doesn't even have 3G yet Japan and europe are working on going beyond that.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Agreed about OO.org. I use the "standard" edition of Google Apps which does offer for free the use of Google Docs and Spreadsheets.

          Docs is horribly uninteresting. FCKEditor [fckeditor.net] has more formatting options than Google Docs. It's not an office competitor in my mind.

          Spreadsheets is a bit better, but 2G is plenty of email space for my small business.
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            I agree.

            I looked at it, but for $50/account it is a lot of money ($1200 vs free) and I can't upgrade only select accounts.

            If it were $50/10GB I would get it, because I only have 2 accounts that need more space.

            Also, does anybody know if it lifts the tiny 10MB email limit? If I could send 50MB files it would be a lot more valuable.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      This is still a problem, but we're getting increasingly close to a world where you can go pretty much anywhere and still have net access. Converting an entire business with a lot of travelling employees to Google Apps instead of traditional apps that will work on a non-networked PC is probably still premature, but there may be businesses who don't rely as much on travel that might give it a try.
      • Re:obvious flaw? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Bert64 (520050) <bert@@@slashdot...firenzee...com> on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:25AM (#18108798) Homepage
        I would use this, if google offered me the facility to install these apps on a server under my control.
        In a large office with hundreds of users, having all that traffic heading out through the wan interface would be prohibitive, it would be much easier to only have the few off-site workers traffic heading in through the wan interface instead.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Converting an entire business with a lot of travelling employees to Google Apps instead of traditional apps that will work on a non-networked PC is probably still premature,

        Yes, as as user of google apps, I can say its not ready yet...

        For example, maintaining email lists for mail outs isn't really working yet. Even though you can redirect your gmail to another address, if you try and put that address into the email list for a group mail out it can fail. Specifically, if the address uses characters that ar
      • Re:obvious flaw? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by tomstdenis (446163) <tomstdenis AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:20AM (#18108728) Homepage
        That's where OpenOffice comes in. We're inventing technology we just don't need.

        Documents should be stored in some sort of version control system (CVS, etc). When you hit the road you check out the revision you need and store it locally. Not exactly hard.

        When I travel to give my talks [e.g. toorcon] I usually have 3-4 copies ofthe talk with me. On a CD, on a laptop, on a USB drive, etc. That way if one fails [which has happened] I have another. One year I went there my laptop wasn't all smooth so I had to borrow one, no problem, files on a usb drive, used another laptop and went on my way. Had I been stupid and put the presentation in a single spot [e.g. google] I'd be fucked [also because Toorcon NEVER has net access].

        Also you have to think about the needless traffic this generates with minor revisions/etc going over the wire. Think of it like a dumb terminal, but with millions of users from all over the globe. That has to be a lot of traffic.

        Tom
  • by QuantumRiff (120817) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:01AM (#18108514)
    I use the google apps at home, even though I have a licensed copy of office, cause I like to access it easily from work and home.. However, the one very limiting factor is the spreadsheets won't connect to databases. Lots of businesses have excel doing simple DB reporting, and this just won't work with the spreadsheet app. (yet??)
    • by MindStalker (22827) <jlarsen&fsu,edu> on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:06AM (#18108560) Journal
      As well the loss of mail merge style features in Doc (people are still calling it writely??).

      I never really expect to see full macro capabilities, but a simple mail merge, even from google speadsheet would be nice.
    • by cmacb (547347) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:11AM (#18108650) Homepage Journal
      I anticipate the Google apps are going to continue to improve. Since last night they have added fonts (was a very basic selection before), added the docs and spreadsheet into the domain settings so that things are easier to share within-company.

      Also, after they bought Writely and the spreadsheet company they also baught a second spreadsheet company. Reviewing their product I noticed it had a much more complete set of Excel features. How hard would it be for them to tack an SQL service to this? My guess: Not too hard at all.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        How hard would it be for them to tack an SQL service to this? My guess: Not too hard at all.
        You probably guess correctly. But how hard will it be for Google to persuade companies to upload their databases to Google servers? My guess: Seriously difficult to sell.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          That's not necessary, is it? The company could have its own SQL server requiring a username and password that the google app could connect to and present the results in whatever way they want. And besides, Google isn't going to start being a free database host, that's just crazy! It wouldn't be feasible.
    • by garcia (6573) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:22AM (#18108768) Homepage
      Or the fact that, currently, Writely doesn't even have the most basic functionality like utilizing the INSERT key on the keyboard?

      Sorry, but it's not going to replace any Microsoft Office product until the program works like *every other* word process on the most basic level.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            I still haven't found the niche a word processor is supposed to fill. I write one 1,000-3,000 word article a week, various letters, and am in the middle of writing a book. None of these seem to require a word processor. I've tried using one a few times, and watched my productivity plummet. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to their use?
  • Fair Comparison? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatman@gm a i l . com> on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:01AM (#18108518) Homepage Journal

    [Google Office Stuff] for $50 a year per employee. By comparison, businesses pay on average about $225 a person annually for Office and Exchange

    Is that really a fair comparison, though? Google's email is great, but their Spreadsheet and Word Processor solutions are nowhere near as sophisticated as MS Office. And in an office environment, many of those differences do matter.

    I haven't played with Google Calendar enough, but would it be a workable replacement for the Outlook calendar? i.e. Can you schedule meetings with a simple invite rather than telling everyone to put it on their calendar? Can other users see your unavailable periods when scheduling?

    I hate to give Microsoft props, but there are features that are critical to the office use of software. If Google doesn't provide those features, they will not be able to compete at all. Which means that the supposed "leverage" with Microsoft would be nothing more than hogwash.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      > Is that really a fair comparison, though? Google's email is great, but their Spreadsheet and Word Processor solutions are nowhere near as sophisticated as MS Office. And in an office environment, many of those differences do matter.

      For simple documents and spreadsheets, Google's office apps are sufficient. And I would say at least 75% of documents are simple enough to fall into this category. I certainly wouldn't call it a replacement though, but rather it works well besides MS Office especially with

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Yea you can send invites in google calendar, but the "availability" features aren't there yet. BUT in their "compare editions" page http://www.google.com/a/help/intl/en/admins/editio ns.html [google.com]
      it states that "Shared Calendar Resources" are available in the purchased edition. I havn't tried it so I can't really comment.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Yea you can send invites in google calendar, but the "availability" features aren't there yet. BUT in their "compare editions" page http://www.google.com/a/help/intl/en/admins/editio [google.com] ns.html [google.com] it states that "Shared Calendar Resources" are available in the purchased edition. I havn't tried it so I can't really comment.

        In the free edition, you can share calendars with eachother and then they can see what you're doing. I'm not sure if there's a specific busy or available feature, but if you see

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Google calendar is pretty decent. It's main drawback is the lack of an easy way to sync to your cell/pda, but i'm sure they'll provide a mobile client that will reduce that need.

      I've done some stuff with Google Spreadsheet and it's surprisingly useful. Sure it doesn't support all the power features of excel, but when you need to throw together a simple sheet (particularly if it involves collaboration between individuals) it works surprisingly well.

      I'd love to see some analysis about which excel features act
    • Re:Fair Comparison? (Score:4, Informative)

      by ip_vjl (410654) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:15AM (#18108688) Homepage
      As of right now (at least with the free version) the integration of calendar and mail is lightweight. You can send invitations from your calendar, but if you receive ical (*.ics) attachments from others, they just appear as attachments and don't have any quick way of getting the info into your calendar. You have to save the attachment, then go into calendar and do an import, but I haven't had that always work - especially with something like a cancellation.

    • by Coryoth (254751) on Thursday February 22 2007, @11:47AM (#18109900) Homepage Journal

      Is that really a fair comparison, though? Google's email is great, but their Spreadsheet and Word Processor solutions are nowhere near as sophisticated as MS Office. And in an office environment, many of those differences do matter.

      Yes this stuff is obviously not going to be as good as a full MS Office install. That doesn't really matter though, because this clearly isn't intended to be an Office "killer" or whatever you want to call it. Google is going after the low hanging fruit - people who have relatively simple needs and would prefer a cheap option, particularly one that has the benefits of offsite backup and accessibility from everywhere. That's not everyone, indeed it is a small market segment, so its hardly going to put a dent in MS Office's market share. On the other hand it is, aparently, a big enough market segment that Google thinks they cna make money at it - and I would tend to agree with them. MS Office is overkill for a lot of small companies, and those same companies tend to be the ones that are less inclined to have full time IT staff to manage file servers, backups, and so on. Just because the product isn't perfect for everyone doesn't mean there isn't a market big enough to exploit. Not everything has to be about total market domination.
  • Great marketing? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bflynn (992777) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:11AM (#18108642)
    From a marketing standpoint, this initially looks to be pretty strong. Google is hitting the white space, but I still have to question it - is the white space there because nobody moved into it or is there because it represents a non-viable product mix?

    I once heard networking defined as being in a room, having your data located 200 feet down the hallway and believing that it is a good thing. I think the ASP model is flawed in providing the needs for large organizations. There are issues surrounding security of data and uptime availability that probably outweigh the cost savings. Security is huge, especially given Google's stated mission to make ALL information available to the world. Do I want to give them my confidential sales information? Not.

    The cost savings isn't what its cracked up to be either, since the cost is $50 per employee, per year. It seems like Microsoft is about 4-5 years between major releases, so your cost is $200-$250 per seat for 4-5 years.

    Overall, I'll pass for now.
  • by smcdow (114828) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:14AM (#18108676) Homepage
    My company has been interested in Google Apps for a while, but we won't touch it until we can buy an Google Apps appliance machine and install it in our own facility.

    We're not holding our breath.
    • by Xugumad (39311) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:26AM (#18108802)
      Agree, absolutely. Love the software, but like hell are we hosting key services elsewhere. With Google hosting the apps, if we lose Internet access, and we might as well close up and go home.

      Personally, I'm amazed there isn't an appliance version of GMail available yet. Although I suppose they'd have to get it out of beta first...
  • Duh (Score:3, Insightful)

    "What we see in the Google Apps is a real focus on making them easy to use and intuitive," she said. "And that's something that Microsoft has been unable to do in all of its years with Office."

    It's easy to make something easy and intuitive when they have almost no capability. Let's see Google make it a lot easier and intuitive AND have the same functionality.

  • by gsyswerda (550684) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:19AM (#18108722)
    Why would a company entrust Google with all their corporate emails, and many of their files as well?
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Large users likely won't trust Google. Before I trust google with anything, I would want to know a bit more how they will use the data, how it will be archived, and if it will be deleted everywhere at some point after I delete a file.

      OTOH, for small businesses that want to keep costs down, this will be useful. One will not need as powerful computers, one will not need in house servers, or rented off site servers, and one will not need to generate a backup plan. I recall at one point when I was backing

    • Why would a company entrust an IT department with all of their corporate emails, and many of their files as well?

      Google becomes an IT supplier with this scheme, and contracts will be written that stipulate confidentiality and security. This is no different than hiring an outside consultancy to run your own company owned servers. Cries of "OMG Gooogle will pwn us all!!!1!one!!" are simply not justified. It's a business relationship, same as any other.
  • by LoudMusic (199347) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:22AM (#18108772)
    The people that really need to watch out are Lotus. I've been admining a Domino server for about 8 years now and let me tell you, it's the second biggest pain in the ass that I have to deal with. Google's solution would fully replace Lotus for all the things we use it for and actually do it better.
  • by Mr. Underbridge (666784) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:39AM (#18108950)
    They're focusing on the $225 vs $50 per employee per year, but $225 isn't the TCO number. You also have to calculate the salaries of the IT staff who maintain the company email server and such, or the hosting for the same. I expect that pushes the number far higher. I'm assuming that Google will also see better uptime than the typical small-company email server, and it's probably smaller companies who will find this most attractive. If I were starting my own company, today, I'd go with this. If I started up with 10 people, I'm looking at $500 per year for full mail hosting and document storage as well as infrastructure for collaboration. I also won't have to buy a single server for anything. I don't have to worry about documents getting lost.

    For what you get, and for everything that you *don't* have to buy, that's idiotically cheap.

  • Other considerations (Score:4, Informative)

    by Twillerror (536681) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:44AM (#18109042) Homepage Journal
    Back when we where considering going from Exchange 5.5 to 2003 ( a huge pain in the butt ) I considered moving us to an online alternative. intranets.com now WebOffice ( webex umbrella ) provided somewhat of an alternative at that point. Now they are even better that they offer email hosting, with your domain not "gmail.com".

    Several factors stopped me from being able to make that jump.

    1) Legacy...everyone was using Exchange and we had tons of email in it that would be a pain to copy into folders.
    2) Regulation. How does google keep all company emails in one place that can be archived and backed up. I'm sure Google won't loose someone's email anytime soon ( less likely then us ), but how do you document their backup procedures.
    3) Current email addresses. No one wanted to give them up.
    4) Internet bandwidth and reliance. People tend to think of the internet like electricity, but we are not there yet. It is funny that I get a faster connection at my house with a cable modem then our dual t1s provide...and a lot cheaper. This is another post, but unless you are in a big data center getting a decent sized pipe at a reasonable price is still overpriced.
    5) Gateway level controls. We wanted to see every email that came in. We run a spam firewall, but if it blocks errantly we have a log. If Google blocks and email?
    6) Customer support emails. We have tons of email addresses for our clients/etc that would probably be a pain to setup.
    7) Fax support. We have to integrate with a fax server...yep it sucks.
    8) Public folders ( ie email boxes accessible by more then one person )...ties in with 6.

    To name a few.

    If I was starting up a small software company I'd be all over this. As far as for enterprise uses...I think Google has a long road ahead of them...but they are speeding car.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      One thing - they wouldn't have gmail.com addresses. Google already offers custom domain email accounts. FTA:

      Companies can customize the Gmail accounts to reflect their workers and firms (worker@firm.com).

      Many of your other stated concerns are somewhat generic to any change in mail services - I encountered several of them by moving our employees to an in-house mail server from a myriad of outside services. IMHO:

      1. Always a problem with changes in service. Users have to decide what's important in their ma

  • by HungWeiLo (250320) on Thursday February 22 2007, @11:07AM (#18109342)
    and you would overhear many MS employees' lunch meetings around here. As early as 3-4 years ago, there was a lot of buzz about starting projects like what Google's doing now. The "Live" initiative will supposedly eventually convince people to submit micro-payments to use Office products. ($0.25 per Word doc creation, $0.50 per printing, etc.) The MS people who were talking about this acted like it was the best thing since sliced bread and that it will cure cancer. It'll probably be deployed around 2015.
  • by snowwrestler (896305) on Thursday February 22 2007, @11:22AM (#18109554)
    Google is using Microsoft's own tactic against them--use one strong revenue stream to subsidize aggressive underselling in another. Almost all of Microsoft's profit comes from their Windows/Office/Exchange product lines--they then use this profit to offset heavy losses as they attack new markets (like--Internet advertising). Google is simply executing the reverse--using their strong ad revenue to subsidize an attack on Microsoft's office turf. Even if few companies actually sign on with Google, they're all going to use Google's offering to negotiate lower pricing with Microsoft, thereby hurting a key revenue stream--mission accomplished.

    Microsoft's battle against GO Penpoint is instructive because it's well documented from both sides. The GO side is covered in the famous book Startup, and the Microsoft side is covered in the book Barbarians Led by Bill Gates. In that book the GO chapter ends with the death of Microsoft Pen Windows and a revelation from one of the managers--that the goal was not to sell Pen Windows, but simply to block GO's success in the marketplace---"Block the kick," not score the touchdown.
  • by peterbiltman (1059884) on Thursday February 22 2007, @11:40AM (#18109792) Homepage
    In this day and age of lawsuits and corporate rules and regulations I can't see any large company using hosted services where their data resides on other servers. That would open up a whole can of legal problems, especially if that data was compromised. Another example is say that Google kept backup tapes for 10 years, but company was policy was no backups for more than 6 months. A lawsuit comes along and the lawyer for the other side realizes you use Google and subpoeanas the backup tapes from Google and finds the evidence they want.
  • They Fail (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hhawk (26580) on Thursday February 22 2007, @12:00PM (#18110080) Homepage Journal
    Here is where they just FAIL trapped in the warp of their own success not knowing the failure that waits for them behind the next door.

    I like google, gmail, etc, etc., etc..

    All I wanted was to get some extra space in my inbox since the free space isnt' enough for me..

    To use this service you need to have a domain name...
    I own serveral but I don't want my email @ my domain name

    All of that is a minor point, just well something that I want...

    Here is why they fail...

    I can't contact them... there isn't an easy simple way to reach them and find out if there is an alternative..

    When you click through into their help system you get into page after page of "try this and try that..."

    It's one thing to offer free stuff for FREE and skimp on the help...

    When your trying to sell something.. you need to be able to help people...

    Not that my problem is such a big deal, but each group of people signing up will have their own problems, and the biggest one is that they can't get anyone on the phone or in email, without jumping through so many hoops, pages, forms and FAQs that well, it's like talking to a wall...

  • by suggsjc (726146) on Thursday February 22 2007, @12:16PM (#18110292) Homepage
    gMail is pop. As slick as the interface is, I really like working with IMAP or even Exchange servers. It is nice for all of my devices to be in sync. I hate checking email on my phone, then getting back to gMail and everything I did is (to some extent) lost.

    If gMail implements IMAP, *THEN* they will have a much more competitive offereing, at least on the email side of things.
  • Welcome back to 1975 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2007, @01:14PM (#18111146)
    Welcome back to 1975, where mainframes and 'pay as you go' computing ruled the day.

    The Personal Computer, if google/microsoft have their way, will cease to exist. Welcome back the dumb terminal.

    Let google/microsoft store all your data, for a low monthly fee.

    Use all your favorite applications, for a low monthly fee.

    It's the old micropayment bullshit, disguised as a new 'pay as you go' initiative. Same shit, different smell.

    1975 called, it wants its 'micropayment' system back.
    • by Constantine XVI (880691) <trash...eighty+slashdot@@@gmail...com> on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:04AM (#18108542)
      Dont think of it as an instant messenger then. Think of it as a "textual telephone"* that goes over the Internet. I've seen a few businesses around here where IM has become as important as email and the telephone to keep in touch

      *Yes, I know, GTalk does voice also
    • by lucabrasi999 (585141) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:08AM (#18108588) Journal
      Forgive my ignorance, but I thought that everyone except Google believes GChat to be a great time-waster, not something you'd offer to your corporate clients to increase productivity at work...?

      I was about to moderate this discussion, but I had to respond to you. Instant Messaging, despite rumors to the contrary, can actually be a very productive tool at work. My company uses Lotus Sametime, and I have found it to be a very useful way to get responses to quick questions. No, you cannot hold major discussions over Instant Messaging. And, if you work in a small (

      IMHO, the productivity that is gained by Corporate IM easily outshines to potential pitfalls.

      • by xtracto (837672) on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:17AM (#18108694) Journal
        I agree, back when I was in the university I used to perform my programming projects with 2 other friends, we usually fired Windows Messenger + application sharing (word, notepad and other things) to share some code and the like. I am talking about 2001 or 2002. It was great, at least for us. I think one of the "secrets" is that
        1. All the members in the conversation *must* know how to touchtype (or at least write faaast).
        2. All the members in the conversation *must* agree to write 1 paragraph with one idea per "message" I\n, hate\n, when\n, people\n, writes\n, one\n, word\n, and\n ,press\n enter\n.

        It started as a "cool" experiment (to test the "new technology") but it was so helpful that we used it trough the remaining University time. This all was on 56k dialup, and yeah it was fast enough for us.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 22 2007, @11:35AM (#18109720)

          I think one of the "secrets" is that
          1. All the members in the conversation *must* know how to touchtype (or at least write faaast).
          2. All the members in the conversation *must* agree to write 1 paragraph with one idea per "message" I\n, hate\n, when\n, people\n, writes\n, one\n, word\n, and\n ,press\n enter\n.


          I don't think that word means what you think it means.
        • If you're looking for the state of the art today, take a look at the SubEthaEdit text editor for OS X. Basically, it is a text editor that can post a document on a LAN (autodiscovery via zeroconf) or on the internet if you know the hostname or IP and allow for collaborative editing. What is really nice is it has multiple, real time cursors so everyone can be typing at once with their own insertion point. It makes pair programming so much easier than hacked together solutions where giant chunks of text are s

          • >>> Why not just, like, meet? It can be pretty productive with all of the 'high productivity' tools out there like... pencils, paper, whiteboards and pens."

            Because it takes FOREVER to write debug errors on the whiteboard.

            (stoopid whiteboard with no cut-n-paste.)
      • by TrippTDF (513419) <hiland@@@gmail...com> on Thursday February 22 2007, @10:21AM (#18108746)
        We use a Jabber-based system at my office. If you are not on it at all times, the boss gets pissy. It's the primary way we communicate in-office. We mostly use it to send links to folders on the file server, or to get quick responses to questions.
        • by teh_chrizzle (963897) <kill-9@NoSpAm.hobbiton.org> on Thursday February 22 2007, @02:13PM (#18111992) Homepage

          IM is way better than email for 90% of what people use email for.

          when i worked on a helpdesk, we were all on the phone all the time, and we used AIM and an AIM chatroom to IM with eachother about stuff like what systems were up, what was down, that sort of thing. you can talk on the phone (well, listen to an idiot yammer) and answer other people's questions pretty easily that way. plus, you can have several conversations going at once which is way more efficient than a single phone conversation. it's also a great way to move files between people you know since most corporate email systems strip the most interesting of attachments without some sort of manipulation.

          i would do personal stuff with it as well... IMing with my wife all day cuts down on the "how was your day/we never talk anymore" meme that cuts into precious evening game time... both mine and hers.

          my only beef with IM is that even with clients that let you have several "presences" (jabber/trillian) there aren't many that let you talk to people while they are in an MMORPG. asheron's call had a third party plugin system called DeCAL that let you run many things, including an IRC and aim client ingame which created an allegiance chat channel before one was added to the game in addition to being reachable while in game... but to my knowlege there is no way to reach someone with a default install of a given game without being logged into the game as well.

          it would be nice to be able to tell my little brother that he has a meat body somewhere outside of WOW that needs to eat dinner once in a while.