 |
 |
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