While there have been both noteworthy pros and cons mentioned about this issue so far, it seems that many people are missing another big point. I always thought that the largest issue most MSU members have had with mail.msu.edu is available storage. The 128MB quota is just too low for most students and faculty, which gives them two options: either download their email to a local computer (and lose backups and the ability to access it anywhere) or forward to another account with more space available. That is what makes Gmail, Yahoo! and Hotmail so attractive, they offer far larger amounts of storage (2GB-5GB). Currently about 2/3 to 3/4 of our users (out of ~1,300) forward their MSU mail to our system and our storage allocations are a little more liberal than MSU's (faculty/staff get 512MB and students get 256MB). Now whether it is financially feasible for MSU to offer even a modest increase in mail storage space is a whole other question.
Outside of space constraints, I do believe Nick is correct that the next biggest issue is the front-end interface with things such as additional features (calendar, IM, etc) being a much lower priority. There is also the difference in opinions between faculty/staff and students. A good example of this is calendaring features. Our faculty and staff love it and many could not live without it, where as students have always had access to the same features but rarely ever use them.
--
Stephen Bogdanski
Network Support
College of Veterinary Medicine
Michigan State University
>>> On 8/30/2007 at 8:36 AM, <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I would like to echo John's comments about keeping the system in house...
>
> I think the backend system that mail.msu.edu is extremely powerful, and is
> still extremely well performing considering its load (and load of spam, of
> course). E-Mail arrives as expected, and is unaltered when using the SSL-POP
> connection.
>
> Investment needs to happen on the front-end. Put a good web-designer,
> usability expert, and good developer in front of mail.msu.edu and have them
> at it. It won't take much to redesign the 'mail.msu.edu' front-end. You
> could probably have a contest among the students to design the template, if
> you want. Many of the features that people like about the gMail system is
> related to its front-end. The front-end is a sleek, AJAX interface that does
> what it needs to do, requiring minimal interaction from the user to use. It
> mirrors traditional mail clients such as Eudora or Outlook in that it dosen't
> require 5 clicks to see your email (rather it may require at most two).
>
> -Nick Kwiatkowski
> MSU Telecom Systems
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: MSU Network Administrators Group on behalf of John Simpkins
> Sent: Wed 8/29/2007 6:58 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Five more US schools go to GMail for email, apps
>
>
>
> Here's some clarification on my views, since my original post contained
> a conceptual error, as well as wording that is not explicitly contained
> in Google's various TOS pages. I'm glad to learn that Gmail won't be
> using any personal communications in any way other than to provide the
> Gmail service; this is something I overlooked.
>
> However, as written, the TOS in Google Docs and Spreadsheets (presumably
> a service which Google, the University, or both will promote to MSU
> students) gives Google a great amount of privilege in its legal usage of
> user-submitted content. Though they state that only content made
> available to "members of the public" is fair game, they do not
> explicitly outline the group(s) that this term encompasses. Logically,
> "members of the public" could include recipients of email in which a
> link to a Google document could be contained.
>
> Further, in conjunction with Google's Universal terms of service, any
> content submitted or received (regardless of which Google service the
> information resides upon) is subject to this clause: "Google reserves
> the right (but shall have no obligation) to pre-screen, review, flag,
> filter, modify, refuse or remove any or all Content from any Service."
>
> Though Google does not have an "unlimited" license to the user-submitted
> content, it has wide-reaching rights, per its terms of service, to make
> use of that content in ways which are violative of University
> information-handling principles and precedent.
>
> I can understand that this offer is attractive in the face of
> skyrocketing IT costs, but it sets a precedent that is deeply
> troubling. As more information is synthesized, manipulated, and
> transferred over computers and networks, a question of precedent arises
> as to the role of the University in the management of its information.
> My comment about money in the first email was inspired by my belief that
> it is the University's responsibility as a public institution to keep
> its information and knowledge from being given freely to a private
> entity. I pay the University tuition. At least a few of these dollars
> go toward the current IT system that the University maintains. Would I
> see a substantial savings in my tuition if the University contracted
> information handling services out to an organization? Even if so, what
> kind of precedent does outsourcing of University data set for the role
> of a public institution of higher education? Upon invention of the
> filing cabinet, did the University ever contemplate outsourcing of
> records storage to a private company that owned a warehouse full of
> filing cabinets? The United States has long had a public postal
> system. There were good reasons for this, and the system has served us
> well. The integrity of personal communication is essential to the
> progressive nature of a public institution like Michigan State, and
> given the nature and terms of Google's offer, I cannot see a reason why
> it would be in Google's interest to maintain this integrity.
>
> There is no such thing as a free lunch.
>
> -John
|
