Talk:Google Workspace

Eating dog food
Would it be beneficial ting Google Apps internally? --Kushalt 15:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it would a wonderful addition. GJ (talk) 16:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Either the heading of this section was meant to be poetic or it's vandalism! Qwertyfish11 (talk) 20:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Dog eat dog 59.164.104.147 (talk) 14:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Neither, it's a common expression in the English-speaking I.T. industry, deriving from "Dogfooding", meaning that a Tech Company is using their own produced software and/or hardware solutions for own internal use to prove and show that the company believes in their own products to be used internally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.79.168.158 (talk) 12:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Standard Edition excludes businesses? (License changes)
Lately I've noticed that Google Apps Standard Edition has changed wording to resemble that it is not for any kind of businesses anymore. E.g Standard edition page speaks of only groups and families, which is rather vague. It used to include "small businesses" but not anymore, I've been wondering is it anymore legal to register standard edition for "small businesses", like hair salong etc. Also this page says explicitely in standard edition link that "Not a business? Explore Standard Edition", I'd definitely like to know if Standard Edition is not anymore allowed for (small) businesses. Ciantic (talk) 16:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Google Wave
Google Wave development has been discontinued. It will disappear as it is integrated into other Google technologies. Citation: http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2010/08/google-wave-to-be-discontinued.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.208.80 (talk) 17:55, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Team Edition
Is it me or has this edition been discontinued?Jasper Deng (talk) 02:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

This section was incorrect and is now out-of-date

 * ... except for this paragraph! (13 August 2013): The first list has vague and incomplete correspondence to some of the previous editions that were discontinued in 2011 and 2012. The two lists should be approximately the other way round (see following subsection for details).

The following are [were] real Google Apps editions [prior to December 2012]: The following are not [in fact] Google Apps editions [as of December 2012[], but are instead just [thus they are not] marketing ploys. Jasper Deng (talk) 02:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Google Apps Standard Edition
 * Google Apps ISP Edition — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.240.90 (talk) 18:34, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Google Apps Premiere Edition
 * Google Apps Education Edition
 * Google Apps for Business
 * Google Apps for Government
 * Google Apps for Nonprofit

These are the available editions on 13 August 2013
The first list above was always inaccurate and incomplete. It became out-of-date quickly, which is understandable in these emerging fields. The second list above uncannily appears to be the exact opposite of the current situation. I find that a little less understandable. Those items postured as marketing ploys in fact constitute an almost complete list of the editions currently available. Sorry to sound uncharitable, but I didn't appreciate the false claim that no discount was available for charitable organizations. Google Apps was free then and remains free now for all charities registered in America, England, or Wales (the last being important to me). Curiously, reference to any Google Apps edition by a name that includes Edition (capitalized) is now guaranteed to be about an obsolete discontinued edition. This following list represents availability after the phased withdrawal of Google Apps for Teams that started on 4 September 2012, and the 6 December 2012 scheduled but instant demise of Google Apps free edition (sometimes referred to as "Standard Edition").

These are the editions of Google Apps available on 13 August 2013: The last three are known collectively as the Google Apps special interest editions.
 * Google Apps for Business - sometimes just called Google Apps, now.
 * Google Apps for Business with Vault - advanced security for data archiving, discovery and retrieval.
 * Google Apps for Nonprofits - for charitable organizations registered in Wales, England, or the US.
 * Google Apps for Education - for students, staff, and faculty at educational institutions - all ages, and in many countries.
 * Google Apps for Government - if you need this edition, you'll already know!

In the next day or so, I will introduce this along with post-2102 pricing and specifications into the main article, as it too is a little out of date in this regard. Sincerely, ChrisJBenson (talk) 03:46, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * As of 14 August 2013, a special single-user edition of Google Apps Standard is still available for free for Google AppEngine developers who want to manage their Google-hosted application on an own domain, or those who just sign up using a special link, as described here: . Regards,  kashmiri TALK  18:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I knew about this developer version. I deliberately omitted it from my list here, because if I understand correctly, it is restricted to just one user per domain, and there is a hint of other restrictions or missing applications from the "regular" Google Apps for Business. I assume that it is only really of use to a developer, and for a presumably temporary testing period (none of my own projects seem to have a temporal end though). Is my summary correct? Do you think it should be included when this list gets moved into the actual article? I would be fine with that it there is a short (and verifiable) summary of restrictions and missing components. ChrisJBenson (talk) 10:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure about available apps now. Until a few months back, it was possible to sign up for that developer version, click the upgrade button, create 9 more users and then downgrade within the grace period, and you were left with a fully functioning free Google Apps "standard" edition (I just checked - and yes, it appears to have all the apps). This trick is no longer possible but I haven't heard of any other restrictions. Judging from Google's past policy of preserving the original account features, the "developer edition" shouldn't be temporary, though.
 * I agree all of this doesn't need to be included in the article - but a brief mention of this, after all, official release would be fair. Anyway, if you skip this info now I believe someone else will add it at one point.  kashmiri TALK  20:12, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Some people think what?
So, in the article, it states "Some people consider Google Apps (formally Google Apps Standard Edition) as a regression compared to regular Gmail." - really? When since do anonymous comment posts on a mostly anonymous forum style system meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion? I suspect the above noted line should be removed unless it can be found to be corroborated by a reliable source and properly cited. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 00:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I am removing the improperly sourced sentence. At best, it belongs in a different section. And of course, at worst (current situation), it needs to be properly sourced to something that is NOT akin to a blog/forum, by a non-anonymous person, as opposed to (Anon) "I think it's a regression", (Anon 2-3) "Me too!!!"
 * I suspect by WP:BRD, I'm the revert to someone else's bold insertion, meaning, if someone disagrees, let's discuss! Either way, let's discuss if there's disagreement. I do not necessarily disagree with the premise the sentence is trying to portray - I am simply against it's addition due to the insertion not following properly policies and guidelines (location, citing, reliable sources, proper sourcing, etc). Best, R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 17:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In the event people do wish to discuss this, here's the link that was cited, for easy review: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Apps%20Partner/thread?tid=088d9d3e59bfcdaa&hl=en
 * R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 17:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Why was: see also "Criticism of Google," removed?
Yesterday I added Criticism of Google to the "See Also" list, now, ZAP! it's been removed by Zouzzou. This forces me to beat a dead, obvious horse: One reason people might come to "Google Apps" is they are concerned about, (or following a link regarding;) Googleopoly, or any of the other topics addressed there. ...and so forth. I'm putting it back as per BRD protocol... Let's discuss if there is still a problem. (Is this article true, fair & objective?) --69.110.91.98 (talk) 02:35, 4 August 2011 (UTC)Doug Bashford
 * If I read correctly, in the "Criticism of Google" page, the only thing in relation with the "Google Apps" page is 3 lines about Gmail. AND, in all Google Apps editions, ads can be turned off in each account !
 * That's why I don't understand why we should see this "See also". --Zouzzou (talk) 11:07, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree, the only criticism would be world devouring and that's sort of assumed. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 02:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

No free plans
http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/features.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.161.240.201 (talk) 13:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I thought that too, but it is free if you look a little further, apparently there's something like "google apps classin/non-evil", "google apps for education", and the $5/user month thing. The first two are still free. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 02:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

The big picture
Until I set this up, I was unclear exactly what it was. I thought it might be some kind of app framework like Android, competitive with something like SharePoint, but it's basically nothing more than their apps like docs, gmail and calender bundled with their core line of biz, rip on DNS. This and that it is a competitor to Exchange and what kind of market segment is likely to buy into it should be able to be properly phrased, sourced. The comparison article in the See Also does this for those who go there and appraise but some sort of summary statement ought to be in the lede here. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 02:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

We?
"In the UK, it is not possible to obtain information relating to Google and RIPA requests[38] but we know"

Who is we? Please use first person, plural or otherwise only in a quote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.15.177.37 (talk) 21:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Cade Metz seems to have written a lot of articles, according to the References section.
I think the References section needs an overhaul. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.240.172.87 (talk) 22:39, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm looking for this info, here. & I don't found it either
The subject is about two:
 * from the Spanish WP, but Cfr.: Here? Which is the info'bout? I don't find it!
 * 1) . dec'12 (XII'12) Google kills off free Google Apps offering
 * 2) . june 2013: version for one user: discontinued by Google (es:). At the end of the Spanish section (at those dates), history (historia).
 * 7 de diciembre de 2012 - Google discontinúa la versión gratuita de Google Apps.38 Aún está disponible una versión gratuita de un solo usuario para los desarrolladores de Google App Engine a través de un proceso de inscripción especial.39
 * Junio de 2013 - Google discontinúa la versión de Google Apps para un solo usuario.[cita requerida]

38 & 39: ref.:

 * ↑ «Google kills off free Google Apps offering». ZDNet. 7 de diciembre de 2012.
 * ↑ «Use Google App Engine to Get Google Apps for Your Domain for Free». 11 de diciembre de 2012. Consultado el 23 de febrero de 2013.

May be a help (above)

 * 
 * 
 * 

conclusion (my question)
Although many words, above. I say that I am not an expert about products & Google's sw. But I saw (es:) that the product I was looking for was discontinues & previously dissapered the freeware (free sw). Then I came here lokking for the same info. It's the reason I'm writing here. Thanks. --PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 07:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Difference between Google for Work and Google Apps for Work?
Hello. I was going to expand Google for Work with third-party references, but I keep finding references about Google Apps for Work instead. Is Google Apps for Work a product of Google for Work? If that is the case, shouldn't this article be merged with the "parent" Google for Work article?Zigzig20s (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia
Hi everybody! This is a note to say that I have copied some information from this article into Google Drive. This is a post for proper attribution. Have a nice day! :) LocalNet (talk) 17:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Legacy support (or lack of support)
I think something should be said about the limitations of GSuite, including that it is not fully compatible with Google Assistant features, and also the fact that legacy Google Apps for Your Domain users (and other previously available free tiers) are often excluded from new features and services such as Google One. zzyss (talk) 03:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. I came here for an objective view to consider beside Google's marketing, to help decide whether my organization should use G Suite. Before I'd gotten half-way through the page, I'd come to the conclusion it was written by Google's marketing folks. I don't know about legacy support in specific, but EVERY app, every platform, every everything, has SOME limitations, weaknesses, and valid criticisms. That this article mentions none makes it very suspect. --108.202.57.96 (talk) 18:41, 2 November 2018 (UTC) Bedawyn

Unlimited storage no longer available
Hi, in the past few months Google has started enforcing parts of its Workspace Enterprise terms that have technically always limited all Workspace Business and Enterprise plans to 5 TB of storage per paid user added to the account. You can see the updated overview of plans here which only distinguishes Business Plus and Enterprise by adding that Enterprise have the "ability to request more" storage. I don't believe there's a support article clarifying exactly how the new storage limitations work. Many support representatives still seem confused, but after speaking with a few over the past few weeks it's clear that unlimited storage is no longer available and once the specifics are certain that information should be updated.

From my talks with support reps here's what I've been told.
 * Enterprise accounts now require 5 users per before you can request more storage.
 * Extra space is provided in 25 TB allotments. It may go higher with more users on the account, but I'm not sure and didn't think to ask.
 * You can only request more storage every 90 days, but requests are not guaranteed, and if denied it still triggers the 90 day cool down.
 * If the account drops below 5 users, you of course lose 5 TB per use removed, but also all of the extra storage requested. Thus starting the process of requesting more space every 90 days over again.

I suppose it could still be argued that with enough time and enough requests for more data while maintaining 5 users on the Workspace account, you could get a seemingly unlimited amount of storage. But before these changes, when apps asked the API how much storage you had left, it actually returned "unlimited". Now it returns a value relative to the users you pay for and the requests approved. Ramma314 (talk) 08:45, 8 July 2023 (UTC)