Comments on: Despite Recent Outages, Google Claims 99.9 Percent Reliability For Gmail (And Other Apps Too)

By: Outage? What outage? :: nexidecimal

Outage? What outage? :: nexidecimal — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 18:47:39 +0000

[...] means they experience less than 9 hours of *unplanned* downtime per year. To my knowledge, Google doesn’t have planned downtime that affects its users (whereas most companies have at least weekly or even nightly planned [...]

By: cabin

cabin — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 17:03:33 +0000

thanks….
http://www.beymod.com.tr

By: Jay & Silent Rob » Blog Archive » Almost a year, and what?

Jay & Silent Rob » Blog Archive » Almost a year, and what? — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:43:01 +0000

[...] continues to dominate search, but there are questions as to how reliable Google’s cloud-based apps are. However, as long as Google remains almost the only pay-per-click option on the block, they can [...]

By: Gmail as an Enterprise Dashboard | CloudAve

Gmail as an Enterprise Dashboard | CloudAve — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:46:59 +0000

[...] optionsGoogle: Gmail is more reliable than ExchangeGoogle promises reliability for Docs, CalendarDespite Recent Outages, Google Claims 99.9 Percent Reliability For Gmail (And Other Apps Too) Posted Under : Enterprise Analysis Tags SaaS Enterprise 2.0 Dashboard Cloud Computing [...]

By: This Week in Review [10/28/08 - 11/2/08] « Chacha102’s Opinion’s and General Rants

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:54:22 +0000

[...] downtime compared to other companies. Will Cloud Applications work with buisnesses? Read the Techcrunch Article here, and then head back for my take on it [...]

By: Boycott Novell » Do-No-Evil Saturday - Part III: Legacy, Mail, and Partnerships

Sun, 02 Nov 2008 01:50:58 +0000

[...] was also covered here. To prove his point, he trots out reliability data for enterprise email software from Microsoft, [...]

By: babiboi

babiboi — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 08:53:33 +0000

gmail was down for 30 minutes, it’s still less than other apps

By: links for 2008-10-31 « 個人的な雑記

links for 2008-10-31 « 個人的な雑記 — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 22:07:50 +0000

[...] Despite Recent Outages, Google Claims 99.9 Percent Reliability For Gmail (And Other Apps Too) (tags: google) [...]

By: IT’s About Uptime - The StackSafe Blog » Blog Archive » Links List 10.31.08

Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:12:31 +0000

[...] Google really have 99.9% uptime? According to TechCrunch, Google announced that the enterprise version of Gmail comes with a 99.9 percent uptime guarantee. [...]

By: Napi hírmusta

Napi hírmusta — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:11:29 +0000

[...] egy angol cikk, hivatalos Google forrás még mindig [...]

By: Jake

Jake — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:56:23 +0000

I can’t complain too much about my experiences with Gmail. I’ve been using it for quite awhile, and, yeah, it’s gone down a few times, but not too often. It’s great most of the other times. Though I kind of miss having folders rather than the labels system that they have. I was happier with folder, but, it’s nit picking. The search feature is great, so that helps me find what I need right away.

Jake
NoteScribe: Premier Notes Software

By: Barry Melton

Barry Melton — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:58:41 +0000

I’m relating cost to service quality because it’s a valid, workable business model. You are clearly correct in that ad revenues are generated from free customers, but I was operating under the assumption (perhaps incorrect — I am not a paying gmail customer) that the paid service removes the ads.

That said, they’re offering the service in exchange for ads and the revenue generated from them. Most people seem willing to succumb to this. It certainly behooves them to provide greater reliability as that will build a stronger brand and generate more loyalty… BUT that removes reliability as an incentive to upsell their premier services.

Having seen retail ad rates, it takes one hell of a customer to generate $50 a year in ad revenue, and Google, as impressive as they are, aren’t likely generating that either. So yeah, it’s a simple point — if you need greater reliability, pay for it. Otherwise, here’s a great service for which you give us nothing for aside from your agreement to use.

And as for the need vs. want perspective, PEOPLE might be fine with operating under want fulfillment — businesses don’t have that luxury. It’s likely more acceptable for me to tell my brother that I couldn’t respond to his last-minute invitation because Gmail was down than it is for a business to fail to respond to my customer service inquiry. There ARE people who need reliability, and they’re willing to pay for it.

The point though, really, is that I don’t believe I have the right to impose uptime restrictions on my free service provider. If they aren’t offering what I want, I might complain, but I’d likely just look elsewhere — if nobody were meeting my needs I might pay for such a service. Plenty of people already do.

By: Google: Gmail is more reliable than Exchange | Ugh!!'s Greymatter Honeypot

Google: Gmail is more reliable than Exchange | Ugh!!'s Greymatter Honeypot — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:37:43 +0000

[...] per year (if my calculations are correct), which should be enough for pretty much anyone (although not everyone would [...]

By: The Inquirer ES : Gmail: 99,9% de fiabilidad

The Inquirer ES : Gmail: 99,9% de fiabilidad — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:00:24 +0000

[...] TechCrunch [...]

By: dror

dror — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:56:57 +0000

First a little plug. If you don’t like google’s performance, go to http://www.6zap.com and either download and install the software or launch it on Amazon’s cloud, and control it’s uptime .

Back to the main issue of uptime. Uptime on a large scale is really hard. As someone pointed out 99.9% of uptime is 9 hours of outage. The holy grail of five nines, 99.999% uptime, which is what you’re supposed to get with your phone is only 5 minutes of outage a year. That’s not only incredibly hard, but it’s not really measurable until a service has been running for 5-10 years. And let’s not forget, all this software in the cloud keeps changing all the time, which makes it even harder to provide this kind of hard time.

Another way to look at it is: cheap, good, reliable pick any two, where good refers to the features that are added to the apps. Sure we can make products that are reliable and have tons of features. Just pay us $1000/user/year and we’ll build them for you .

By: Surender

Surender — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:56:28 +0000

Google is not showing correct data.It’s impossible to 99.99 reliability.
http://www.iboozi.com

By: Xave

Xave — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:36:31 +0000

I’m liking the gwhale.

By: Johann

Johann — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 05:42:15 +0000

99.9% uptime, while it sounds near perfection, isn’t too high as a service provider. After all, 99.9% uptime means 9 hours of downtime in a year.

By: John

John — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 04:59:10 +0000

“…hotmail.com have not been down in years.”

simply not true

By: Jay Cuthrell

Jay Cuthrell — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:09:49 +0000

And yet these same studies have conclusively shown that a great percentage of studies indicate that statistically these same studies supported their own statistics…

By: Jay Cuthrell

Jay Cuthrell — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:07:37 +0000

@Scott – You also posted similar “comments” on VentureBeat that spamvertise your URL and tagline… if I noticed, it’s because you annoyed me — not because your site is memorable.

My annoy-sense is pretty good at these things… and you are at 99.99% annoying now.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:35:14 +0000

outlook works great configured with msn or live mail and no google ads surrounding your mail!

http://12tb.com

By: Yasser

Yasser — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:26:31 +0000

They’re doing a good job. In a nutshell, we all depend on technology way too much at times…

Even the post office cant give you a 99.9% guarantee..

SideNote:
Check out http://www.jobstaxi.com
Great jobs site!

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:13:36 +0000

It works 60% of the time, every time.

By: Envy

Envy — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 01:14:33 +0000

it looks like it was created in a weekend…. the css in IE 7 sucks, layers are out of wack.