Skip to Content

Campus Calendaring Work Group Meeting 8/31/2011

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Date and Time: 
August 31, 2011 - 9:00am - 11:00am
Location: 
SAASB 4101WW
Agenda: 

Campus Calendaring Work Group Meeting August 31, 2011

1. E'Discovery and Data Retention - Following our last meeting we had some exchanges regarding this topic.  Any additional questions should be addressed.

2. Outlook+Exchange Sites - The impact/affect/cost of using Google services.

3. Deliberations - Continue (I think we left off with Jason) "around the room" with each Work Group member presenting their "Pros and Cons" for Google Apps and Office 365.

3. Other Items

Notes: 

Campus Calendaring Work Group
August 31, 2011

Present
Andy Satomi
Bruce Miller
Doug Drury
Jamie Sonsini
Jason Simpson
Jim Woods
Kip Bates
Matthew Dunham
Nathan Walter
Polly Bustillos
Randall Ehren
Ted Cabeen

Not Present
Alan Moses
Bill Doering
Chris Sneathen
Daniel Lloyd
Richard Kip
Thomas Howard

E'Discovery and Data Retention
Jamie presented (what he hoped would be) the final diagram of data retention and recovery features for Google Apps and for Office 365.  Considering only the base products:
 

Google offers 30 day recovery of email or contacts data deleted, but not purged, by the end-user.  A Google process automatically purges deleted data after 30 days.  Calendar and Task data, once deleted is purged and unrecoverable.

Office 365 provides for 30 day recovery of email, contacts, calendar or task data deleted but not purged.  An Office 365 process automatically purges deleted data after 30 days (default).  The end-user has 14 days (default) to recover purged data which is followed by 14 additional days for the system administrator to recover.  The defaults are configurable.

Outlook+Exchange Sites  - The impact/affect/cost of using Google services.
We wanted to better understand just how local Exchange sites are using the Microsoft infrastructure for business processes.  Kip provided a very nice example of how Housing uses their Active Directory services, Sharepoint and Exchange (email and calendaring) to coordinate and execute employee hiring.  It was clear that there was benefit to the built-in interoperability available and that changing this infrastructure would require quite some effort.
 

Deliberations
Instead of continuing with our plan to “go around the room” and have each member present their “Pros and Cons” for each product, we engaged in a more general discussion.

Organizations currently using Microsoft Exchange have developed business processes which rely on the Microsoft infrastructure.  This compels them to retain this environment.  They are interested in Office 365 since it may offer an alternative for some of their Microsoft infrastructure.

No organization presented business processes built on other standards that would significantly impact their choice.

Those who represent organizations with administrative responsibilities were inclined towards Office 365.  They felt that the base product provided fully featured cross calendaring with current Microsoft Exchange organizations, offered better integration with desktop Microsoft Office applications, supported more expansive data retention/recovery capabilities and had better E'Discovery options.  The collaboration features available are very robust, but come at a cost.  These features may be valuable to some organizations and could expand campus collaboration significantly.

Those who represent academic organizations had an expressed preference for the Google Apps for Education option.  Their constituents wouldn’t require rich cross calendaring with local Exchange sites; simply having free-busy data available would suffice for their scheduling needs.  They appreciated that the basic Google offering included core collaboration features which would be immediately useful locally and with others outside of UCSB.  They also valued that the Google product was closely aligned with Internet standards, so would be more easily integrated with other efforts in the academic community also based on these standards.

Decision!
Following these discussions the work group members present decided that our recommendation should include BOTH products.  We will recommend that organizations elect to use Google Apps for Education or Microsoft Office 365 based on the features provided and the needs of their organization.  Our report will include criteria which can be helpful in making this determination.
 

There is lots more to be discussed but with this decision as the foundation we can move on to those discussions.
 

9/6/2011