You don’t see governments or companies using gmail, now do you. Well, small unprofessional companies do, but everyone else has a domain, website, mail server and all the usual internet infrastructure in place. Why should companies and governments use TweetBook or Snapstargram for official communication when they can host their own instance. For the time being, the problem has been that large majority of the people are using these unstable platforms, so companies decided to follow.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Eh, lots of companies use gmail it's just masked by being their own domain and part of g suite.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gmail itself, in that situation, is just a frontend to the mail server. You can use the same domain, on any mail server, with any frontend, and it would work just as well. It's just that Google Workspace apps are familiar to most users. But even then, the industry leader is Microsoft with their Office Suite which is yet another option

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

It's still Google's mail server. The mail client is irrelevant.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I was talking about companies with an email address like myFirstCompanyPleaseTakeMeSeriously(at) gmail.com as opposed to first.last(at)company.com In the latter case you can still have gmail involved but your customers wouldn’t know about it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don’t see governments or companies using gmail, now do you.

Many definitely do use it. But now that many have moved towards microsoft and/or google cloud services (mostly pushed by the private sector), people are indeed noticing that maybe, it's not the best idea for public institutions to be dependent on foreign corporations.

Why should companies and governments use TweetBook or Snapstargram for official communication when they can host their own instance.

Well because "cloud is the future" and hosting your own instances is not "cost effective".

For the time being, the problem has been that large majority of the people are using these unstable platforms, so companies decided to follow.

Big tech companies have been fighting for the dependency of the private sector for decades. Even before the cloud, there was a dependency on windows, Microsoft office and exchange. Now big tech is selling the promise that "they will take care of everything, you don't need a ton of IT employees who administer everything, microsoft/google will take care of everything".

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When it comes to cutting expenses, government institutions are always very interested, so it makes sense to outsource all sorts of things. On the other hand, political decision making can change the situation completely. For example, some countries have decided that all of mining industry, railways, electricity and water must be kept in government hands, no matter the cost. Same sort of things can happen with IT services once you burn your fingers badly enough.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

When it comes to cutting expenses, government institutions are always very interested, so it makes sense to outsource all sorts of things.

On paper, sort of. Government IT projects are often seen as cash machines by private businesses where I'm from because there is often a generous budget and government institutions tend to want to use those budgets completely because if they don't, some will start wondering if they really need that much budget or if it maybe can be shortened a bit.. There have been notorious cases where there were huge projects that ended up being even more expensive than initially planned because the private contractors just milked it. And there is of course a lot of mutual masturbation between government institutions and big tech.

And government institutions tend to follow the private sector. The private sector has been pushing to the cloud for a long time now to the point where virtually nobody is suggesting or providing support for on-premise solutions. When every IT contractors says that moving everything to the google/microsoft cloud is the state of the art (and that there are 0 downsides to it and everything is 100% secure), most will not question it.

some countries have decided that all of mining industry, railways, electricity and water must be kept in government hands, no matter the cost. Same sort of things can happen with IT services once you burn your fingers badly enough.

Recently there has been somewhat of a push for open source solutions and big tech independent solutions for government institutions as they start to notice the downsides and potential security risks. And I mean it's absolutely ridiculous, there are entire IT projects where entire systems and solutions were developed to provide a secure software solution for the military (costing hundreds of millions), but then they want to share those files with sharepoint online..

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

tons of large companies use gmail lol