ie8 fix

Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Microsoft vs. Google: An e-mail showdown at L.A. City Hall

By | September 28, 2009, 10:13am PDT

The city of Los Angeles has a decision to make. You see, the city’s old school e-mail system is pretty outdated and in need of a major overhaul. But like most other municipal governments, the budget for new tech systems is pretty tight these days. And so, city officials have been weighing the option of jumping on board with a cloud offering.

It’s a contract worth $7.25 million, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times. But, in the long-run, it’s worth so much more than that. Los Angeles is the second largest city in the U.S. and scoring a contract to overhaul and modernize the e-mail system could be a major score for either company.

For Microsoft, a win shows that Outlook and Exchange are still big players and worthy of an investment by one of the largest enterprise customers in the nation. (The city currently uses neither Microsoft nor Google for e-mail services.) For Google, it would be a major score for the cloud and could serve as a springboard to prove to other cities around the globe that Google’s e-mail cloud is, in fact, ready for prime time. Talking about Google, Los Angeles city councilman Bernard C. Parks tells the Times:

It would be a flagship contract that they can market to the rest of the country. When you buy it and they put on their masthead that you’re one of their customers, you find a trail of cities that say ‘I’ll follow suit.’

The contract is reportedly such a big deal that members of the council have been told that both Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and Google CEO Eric Schmidt would be happy to come down to L.A. and visit with council members about their decisions.

The city seems to be leaning toward a Google offering but lobbyists have landed on the doors of City Hall to express concerns about security, confidential information and reliability, all important issues that have prompted city officials to (wisely) ask more questions.

Microsoft, of course, is pointing to recent Gmail outages as reasons to think twice about the cloud. Google, by contrast, is touting not only its presence in other large companies and municipalities but also the cost savings that come with taking the cloud route. And it also pointed to the government cloud it’s working on, as part of a federal technology initiative announced earlier this month.

The Times reports that the Google offering has cleared one council committee but needs the OK from a second one before going to a vote by the full City Council. No date for that vote has been set.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Sam has been a technology and business blogger for more than 18 years.

Disclosure

Sam Diaz

Sam Diaz has nothing to disclose.

Biography

Sam Diaz

Sam has been a technology and business blogger, reporter and editor at ZDNet, the Washington Post, San Jose Mercury News and Fresno Bee for more than 18 years. He's a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and a graduate of California State University, Fresno.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
63
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Microsoft vs. Google: An e-mail showdown at L.A. City Hall
makrekdw87-24353647461810270232220173141352 5th Nov
tvhxen,good post!
as a minimum at a greatly reduced price. Cities
like Los Angeles should take advantage of the
competitive situation to drive the cost of email
for the city to near zero.

Remember, with Google, they also get GoogleApps.
One huge plus.
0 Votes
+ -
And Google gets all of LA's confidential information...
Confused by religion 28th Sep 2009
...unless you really believe that they don't datamine like crazy...and use it for their own purposes.

uh-huh.
0 Votes
+ -
Technically
LiquidLearner 28th Sep 2009
any e-mail received or sent by any city employee would fall under Open Records. So that part is a wash. Personally I'd go with a company you can actually get support from. Who do you call when you're having problems with GMail?
certainly demand 24x7 support as part of the
contract.

Also, even if city email fell Open Records law,
Google will not be the ones making it public, LA
would be responsible for that.
0 Votes
+ -
Plus, it takes two to email. Thus gmail will be holding my correspondence with city hall (yes, I'm an Angeleno) any way.

As a taxpayer, I'm pleased that they are taking a look at alternatives. I'm sure that the winner will be the provider who promises the best value.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree on the open records
LiquidLearner 28th Sep 2009
but I was simply pointing out that information privacy shouldn't exactly be a top concern for the city. And I wasn't aware of the support option from Google, how good is the support? Just curious, I know the support MS provides and in 15 years I've yet to come across better. Both online and over the phone. If Google can match that then I'd be impressed.

The article doesn't state, but are they evaluating on-premise Exchange servers vs Google or are they evaluating the MS Exchange Online offering. I have no doubt MS would match Google's price if it were Exchange Online. I hope they properly weigh features as well, Exchange + Outlook is substantially more powerful than Google's offering. And I do recommend many small businesses to Google when it fits their needs, so I'm completely biased here. (I do admit to some though, I like the MS Server offerings a lot.)
0 Votes
+ -
WRONG!!!!!
Confused by religion 28th Sep 2009
Communications between city attorneys and their clients (as well as DAs and other attorneys on staff for the City) and other "privileged" e-mail conversations are not subject to that policy. Likewise, e-mail between patients and doctors is not subject to that policy either.

And what do you do with your litigation holds? How easy or hard is it to gather all communications from the GMail servers to store on your own locked down protected private servers that are subject to court review?

There are many areas in which Google does not meet the bar, so to speak. Even a hosted Exchange solution will have the same issues.

Having one's own in-house mail server (and staff who are accountable to the City) makes sense for LA, since the L in LA stands for Litigation. Or is that Lawyers?
same problems as the Google servers. The big
difference being that Google can afford a lot
better security personnel and staff 24x7 365 days
a year.

But, YES, like you point out, Google MUST keep the
email private, and let the city of LA decide what
to divulge, and not all of it is public.
0 Votes
+ -
Great - now you insult the workers
Confused by religion 29th Sep 2009
There is no better security personnel than those who are employed by the company whose security they are paid to protect. Can't say the same for Google staff who have no boss but Google and damned little accountability to paying customers.
if LA approves. LA will probably insist on no
advertising.

In any case, just like ANY other company that
might bid, they would be sued into oblivion if
they broke laws and illegally used any
information in the emails.
0 Votes
+ -
Uh, what law are you citing?
No_Ax_to_Grind 28th Sep 2009
As far asd I know Google owns everything and its theirs to do with as they wish.
illegally accessed personal information.
0 Votes
+ -
Uh, what law are you citing?
No_Ax_to_Grind 28th Sep 2009
As far as I know Google owns everything and its theirs to do with as they wish.
0 Votes
+ -
Life, perhaps?
0 Votes
+ -
You rather trust Microsoft with the information
Randalllind Updated - 28th Sep 2009
LOL
0 Votes
+ -
Interestingly enough...
914four 28th Oct 2009
... my former employer once sent out an email forbidding us from using Hotmail for any business related email because of the clause in Passport that gave Microsoft rights not only to the email but ownership of the contents.
0 Votes
+ -
And MS would gladly match that
Michael Kelly 28th Sep 2009
and include Office Web Apps if that meant the difference between winning the contract and losing it. The city will win out on price either way, so it'll really get down to which service they like better.
Google and MS to get the lowest price for the
best technology.
0 Votes
+ -
What Microsoft would actually do...
Mihi Nomen Est 28th Oct 2009

... threaten the city with a machine-by-machine audit to look for warez and ...

0 Votes
+ -
Near Zero?
GuidingLight 28th Sep 2009
They will probably do it for free? Why? That would get them in deep with the DOJ.

Tell me, if the a competitor of the company you work for went aftr all your accounts, offering the same product for free, how long before your company would have them in court under "dumping" charges?

There is only so much they can do, and most people are not large fans of Google Apps and their limitations.
provider, there will not be any problems here.
Both MS and Google have been giving free email to
other public institutions (schools) and nobody
cares. Giving it free to city governments will
not cause any problems either.

Also, as we rarely print documents any more, the
features of MS Office are getting more bloated
and baroque every day. What we DO want to do with
documents is collaborate and share via the web.
0 Votes
+ -
Tough Choice
NeutralCorner 28th Sep 2009
Hmmm... vote for the "safe and stable" and provide solid email and collaboration technologies ... or vote to be "cool and cutting edge" and get interviewed in trade mags and flown around the country to speak at conventions... any guesses as to which way they want to vote?
0 Votes
+ -
False dichotomy. They can have both.
DonnieBoy 28th Sep 2009
NT.
0 Votes
+ -
Just to point out
LiquidLearner 28th Sep 2009
Don't want to get involved in the argument per se, but you don't have to be a monopoly to exhibit anti-competitive behavior.
you do not have a monopoly. Does not necessarily
make it right though.

Apart from the legal issues, a good question is if
it is good or bad to have companies like Google
and Microsoft almost paying LA to let them be the
email / document solution. Obviously this will
save taxpayers money.
0 Votes
+ -
Always a smart buying/negotiation tactic.
the price of desktop OSes to go to zero.
0 Votes
+ -
Absolutelly wrong
GuidingLight 28th Sep 2009
And, next they will be doing it with desktop operating systems. Look for the price of desktop OSes to go to zero

Why, Chrome OS? While it may be a viable alternative for those that run Ubuntu (The real loser should Chrome become popular)Why would they switch from a desktop that works (windows or apple) to one that may not?

Cost? how much does having control cost?
Chrome OS gains will come mostly from Windows
users who are paying too much for a desktop OS
and have nothing to show for it but problems.

You only have to consider what the average city
employee does with a computer, to understand how
baroque, bloated, and expensive Windows desktops
are for the masses.
0 Votes
+ -
Why Chrome?
storm14k 28th Sep 2009
Thats built for netbooks and people that basically live online. They could look at the commercially backed Linux offerings for choice. Mind you also whos to say Windows or Apple has worked well for them?
year in licensing fees, support, anti-virus
software, data recovery, re-installation, etc.

LA will be able to save a fortune by moving to a
Linux based platform. Just a matter of time . . .
0 Votes
+ -
training costs?
Fark 28th Sep 2009
What's the upfront cost of training staff (you know those brilliant city workers who are totally swift on the uptake and react to change with a smile and a good word).

Training IT staff (this is probably not bad)?

I find it hard enough to teach my older staff new WINDOWS based programs (old dogs new tricks and all...)

I cannot imagine LA City workers getting an alien distro to try out. Would make a great Sitcom.
Firefox or Chrome. Switching to a different email
client is a snap. The only issue might be learning
OpenOffice, but, not many will need that.

And, it is a one time hassle, not a lifetime of
hassles and payments that you get with Windows.
0 Votes
+ -
Hundreds of millions?
LiquidLearner 28th Sep 2009
Windows doesn't cost LA hundreds of millions of an Exchange rollout would be $7.5 million.

Anyway, no enterprise (or even SMB) in their right mind would ever go for a "free" OS. I'm with Storm14k here, they'd go to a commercially backed Linux version where there is accountability and support. And it may be cheaper, it may not. There are so many pros and cons to weight out that one single metric is impossible to go by. The "free" cost of Linux should only be a deciding factor for an enterprise if their IT department is run by fanboy monkeys. Of course, those that would blindly pick Windows without weighing other options fall into the exact same category.
switchover that they are considering.

That is literally hundreds of millions for
licenses, anti-virus software, support, system
repairs and reloads, and on and on and on . . .
0 Votes
+ -
Misunderstood perhaps
LiquidLearner 29th Sep 2009
What I was pointing out that if it is only going to cost LA $7.5 mil in hardware/software to run Exchange than there is no way they are in the "hundreds of millions" range.

And again, reimaging PCs only happens in offices where the IT deparment is slipping or taking the easy way out. Assuming your users don't have admin rights, which they shouldn't given the size, and policies, IPS, GAV, and endpoint protection are all in place then you should have a fairly trouble free environment. Of course I wouldn't run Linux or any other OS without all those protections in place (except maybe endpoint) so you're still down to Windows license costs.
0 Votes
+ -
... and would Chrome OS be free ...
kvkalidindi 30th Sep 2009
in terms of support, data recovery, reinstallation, etc.? How much will it cost in retraining, brand new control applications, etc.

Nice spin, DonnieBoy !! Shilling couldn't more transparent.
0 Votes
+ -
Never going to happen.
No_Ax_to_Grind 28th Sep 2009
No one wants to be forced to use the third car in a three car race.
0 Votes
+ -
Never say never
Earthling2 Updated - 28th Sep 2009
Munich is slowly migrating to LiMux.
They know a little bit about cars, too. happy
"Microsoft, of course, is pointing to recent Gmail outages as reasons to think twice about the cloud."

REALLY? does Microsoft have any idea how much Windows crashes and freezes and vulnerabilities cost this country (US) each DAY in lost productivity and time? Who are they to talk about security when they've been around for what, close to 30 years, and still can't make things work?
0 Votes
+ -
Windows crashes?
Fark 28th Sep 2009
What year is it in your head?

It's been years since I've seen Windows crash or BSOD. I have a ton of employees inhouse - and I have never heard of their machines dying from a OS issue with windows. HDD failure, yes. WIN OS failure? not yet.
0 Votes
+ -
I was going to point out the same...
LiquidLearner 28th Sep 2009
Not to mention we're talking about a controlled server environment versus user desktop PCs. Server failures are incredibly rare and I can't remember the last one that wasn't caused by either a poorly written 3rd party app or hardware. All the back office apps are rock solid. And comparing MS Exchange Online vs GMail is silly, MS puts its money where its mouth is and offers a 99.9% SLA. You can't get the same from Google, even with a paid account.

BSODs today can always be traced to a bad driver or failing hardware. I can't remember the last time Windows did that, even on severly infected PCs.
0 Votes
+ -
One wonders why then...
zkiwi 28th Sep 2009
There are plenty of references and examples of Windows (95,98,2k,XP,Vista, and no doubt 7) BSOD's even to this day, and no, not all of them are to do with drivers.

Just look on microsoft.com to find out that it's not all "sweetness and light" and such.

0 Votes
+ -
Could you be more specific...
DevStar 28th Sep 2009
Microsoft.com is a huge site.

I have 3 Windows boxes in my office running 24/7. No BSOD in years.

We run our automation lab on Windows Server. Probably 100 machines or so, hosted. Downtime in the past 3 years? Zero seconds. Not a single second. Windows has some problems (curb appeal is probably the main one), but stability is not one of them.
0 Votes
+ -
You don't do updates?
b12sklfck 28th Oct 2009
I don't believe you have an uptime of 3 years. No reboots? No updates? I don't know why you have to exaggerate your uptime.
0 Votes
+ -
Have you tried XP?
IT_User 28th Sep 2009
It locks up on occasion. User's fault, not rebooting at the end of the day, but after several days it ain't gonna run. No way.
0 Votes
+ -
It may not crash but is unstable
itguy08 28th Oct 2009
Not crashing, but forgetting network settings, services that won't stop/start, memory nastiness, etc, etc.

We "cured" most of our Windows ills by rebooting about every month. But that's just masking the instability.

And, yes it's good server hardware, up to date drivers, and good practices.

It's Windows as Linux on the same hardware flavors has few problems.
0 Votes
+ -
Exchange crashes? Don't think so.
No_Ax_to_Grind 28th Sep 2009
What article were you reading and was it in the last decade?
0 Votes
+ -
But when you don't have your email, you don't much care what the reason. Not sure why you're looking for the distinction.

0 Votes
+ -
If it's that critical
LiquidLearner 29th Sep 2009
it'll be setup clustered anyway, so a single server failure won't cause any downtime. In fact if handled properly you can migrate from Exchange 2003 to 2007 with no down time.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft vs. Google: An e-mail showdown at L.A. City Hall
makrekdw87-24353647461810270232220173141352 5th Nov
tvhxen,good post!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix