A BLOG written by Microsoft staff has condemned what the firm claims are hidden costs in the cloud-based Google Apps alternatives to its Office applications cash cow.
While Google charges companies just $50 per year for its applications to firms with over 10 employees, Microsoft is keen to suggest that there are other costs as well.
Referring to the costs as a 'tax' the blog criticised Google's methods, saying the costs are unnecessary and add up quickly. Tom Rizzo, a Director at Microsoft wrote that 90 small and medium-sized organizations using Google Apps across 5 countries were interviewed, then he started criticising Microsoft's rival firm's model.
Nine out of 10 companies that were interviewed use Google Apps alongside Office rather than as a complete replacement. This is due to "user readiness, productivity requirements, security concerns and the inability to work offline", Rizzo said, suggesting that the Google alternative would never match Microsoft's features.
It is unsurprising that Rizzo would attempt to promote an anti-Google viewpoint. He said, "Google Apps may seem like acceptable replacements for enterprise-grade products such as Microsoft Exchange Server or Microsoft Office. But many IT organizations have found that Google Apps bring extra, hidden costs."
The post points out that long term Office users wishing to migrate to Google's substitute will have to do so using a migration app costing $20 per user.
The two firms have an obvious rivalry and have taken to the law and public mud-slinging to highlight their own advantages and the other's drawbacks. Recently Google dismissed allegations from Microsoft regarding whether Google Applications had Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) certification.
More recently, Google dismissed an antitrust complaint filed by Microsoft regarding Google's search engine and claiming that it was holding back its own search engine, Bing, with a "pattern of conduct aimed at stopping anyone else from creating a competitive alternative".
We've contacted Google for a response on the latest episode in this story but have not yet received a reply. µ
If they took half the effort they spend on inventing spurious defects in competing products and put it in making their own stuff work better, they would actually deserve their market share and wouldn't be just surfing on previous successes.
And doesn't require a migration app.
M$ greater than !M$
M$ !M$
INQ, MAC AND OTHER PRO-MS WEBSITES FIGHT AGAINST EACH OTHER, WHILE G**GLE AND M$ CONTINUE TO MAKE THEIR MONEY.
WHAT A PATHETIC PIECE OF SHIT IS THIS CORPORATE AMERICA?!
What Microsoft is writing is pure hyperbole. They are saying just because they can. It isn't that anything has changed nor is it that they aren't subject to the same criticism.
All software has hidden costs, free software or commercial, all of them. This is just a way for Microsoft to spread their FUD to try to keep the competition down. It's their nature to be an abusive criminal monopolist, as they are a convicted predatory criminal monopolist.
Such as down time, virii, trying to figure out the stupid ribbon stuff, etc.
Typical M$ FUD, as usual,... to protect its office cash cow.