Would you consider Google Apps Premier?

"Today, [Google] introduces Google Apps Premium Edition, a software suite for companies that provides e-mail, instant messaging, calendar, word processing and spreadsheets. The cost is $50 per worker per year vs. about $500-$600 for Microsoft Office." (Google goes after Microsoft with software suite)

Would you consider Google Apps Premier? Is this a good option for nonprofits? Weigh in here.

Wired has an article on the subject, Google Apps: Should You Switch?
, which offers five reasons to make the switch to Google Apps, and five reasons to stay with Microsoft's platoform.

Would you consider Google Apps Premier? Is this a good option for nonprofits?

Probably not; although it's cheaper than the off-the-shelf price of MS office, $50 per user per year can still add up kind of quickly (for example, we have about 50 users, which would turn into $2500 per year). For a qualifying nonprofit, the $16 for MS Office Standard is still far and away cheaper. Also, I think Google Docs is free and does basic word processing and spreadsheet functions (haven't used it).

The last point in the Wired article may be a doozy for nonprofits on a tight budget -- you have to have Internet access to get to your stuff. I know there are some very small nonprofits out there that cannot afford a high-speed connection, and rely on dial-up for Internet service. To have to dial out and potentially tie up the phone line in order to work on a report would be a bit much.

Also, OpenOffice.org is free and comparable. That would probably be my first choice as an alternative to MS Office.

>> you have to have Internet access to get to your stuff.

This is also the reason our answer would be "no" to Google Apps.

I think 'net connectivity nowadays is viewed a lot like electricity and other services; at home it costs a bit of money, but in the workplace most people just accept it as a given... its just 'there'. Most people do not appreciate the tens-of-thousands of dollars it takes every year (or every month depending on the size of the office), just to power a small office, and just to provide 'net connectivity to each computer.

Any real cost-analysis of a system where 100% uptime of high-speed and fat-pipe broadband is a pre-requisite to people being able to work... is likely to be much less attractive than promoted in this article, especially if factors relating to a higher likelihood of workplace downtime are also included.

Don

Those interested in learning more about Web Apps and linking to resources where they can find directories of what's out there should check out TechSoup's article An Introduction to Web Apps. Share your feedback here.

Most of our non-profit's data is centered around client's personal information. Moving this data back and forth across the internet or making use of a shared service such as this would be a big 'no no' to HIPAA regulations and patient confidentiality concerns.

So, between that and the fact that Microsoft Office is cheaper, the prize goes to Office.

I believe we will see changes in HIPAA and other laws governing protected online storage, of course there is an understandable and legitimate fear. But the FED themselves use online commercial email and storage.

Besides, you don't have to actually store anything online and its a fully encrypted connection and world class infrastructure safer than your own in-house network from eavesdropping, loss of data and most certainly Wifi.

I use free Google Apps for simple things and really like the collaboration aspects. its very convenient to use on the road or from an Internet cafe. a downside is it will burp from a bad connection or other wonderous gremlins in your computer, including your fat Java library. (AJAX)

As for pricing, well I think Google overpriced this offering and really you hear little about it with the current earnings season. I also think Google should simply give it away to non-profit and bonified educational concerns to both seed the market and give something back.

Subscription software may work as a trial for for large companies, but it will take a long time for adoption widespread. People like the idea of owning an application and deciding when to upgrade or not, versus paying forever every year.

I too prefer to own a local application that I possibly pay for every 2-5 years. Besides, little has changed that truly compels with new features or capabilities in almost 10 years in these office applications.

It is the very reason why a vanilla online application like Google Apps is able to exist at all with a thin feature set.

Under some circumstances, Google Apps would be fine. I used Writely (bought out by Google) for some collaborative projects and it worked well for what we did. But I've seen too many network issues to trade off the availability of a locally-installed office suite, like OpenOffice or MS's offerings, for Google's net-only apps.

I've used Google Docs & Spreadsheets, and the main downside to using it as a full-on replacement for a desktop word-processing/spreadsheet app is that if you want to have any degree of control over the printing, Google apps are useless.

Relatively long-standing and useful Word features like headers, margins, Tables of Contents, page numbering, etc, are left to the browser (which means it's not per-document settings and not saved with the document) or simply not available.

It's a great tool for collaborating on text, but one the text is finalized, if print or a print facsimile (eg, PDF) is the ultimate destination, then you have to save it in a WP format and manipulate it there. Large orgs or companies that might be able to centralize that function could perhaps reduce the number of licenses required for MS Office, but I don't see how you can eliminate it all together.

"Google has released a new Javascript API this morning dubbed Gears that adds offline support for web applications. A browser plugin is available for both IE and Firefox and works on Windows, Mac and Linux machines."

-- Read the full article.