Last week, David Berlind -- in his report on Google dropping hints about offering hosted email -- suggested that the vast majority of businesses now in-sourcing their email can't possibly justify the practice. Ridiculous, responded many readers -- and some of David's blogging colleagues.
George Ou debunks what he regards as eight myths of email outsourcing. Does in-house email mean less accessibility, smaller mailboxes and higher costs? No, no and no, writes Ou.
Paul Murphy, in his Managing L'unix blog, recalls IT Commandment #1: Thou shalt not outsource mission critical functions. "Organizations ultimately exist as information and control processing tools, and outsourcing IT therefore diminishes overall organizational value."
But Dion Hinchcliffe thinks in-sourcing email makes about as much sense as maintaining your own power generation facilities. "You can do it, but why would you? Corporate e-mail systems aren't going away any time soon," writes Hinchcliffe in The future is hosted, online e-mail, "But are they become more and more irrelevant?"
And Software as services blogger Phil Wainewright insists the greatest challenge is understanding the real cost of running email in-house. "Most companies do not understand the true, hard costs of their messaging systems"." Wainewright wryly suggests that Perhaps it's time to bring your money in-house, too.
Should you outsource your company's email? Join the conversation....