Google Gossip

Please post interesting insights into this vendor's business and products/services here.

If you wish to post anonymously, please email Please identify yourself so that David can determine that the posting should be taken seriously. Alternatively, you can phone him on +1 415 367 3436. We'll post your material, without identifying you.

One Comment

  1. Posted October 9, 2008 at 4:39 AM | Permalink

    Good move by Google. Good for customers, and good for the overall messaging space. Today especially, better ROI for IT budget is critical.

    Sonian has been offering a similar IM and email archiving service at $36/year unlimited retention. Better economics than Google, built on the Amazon cloud infrastructure which has better scale and reliability than what Google is doing today.

    Archiving, like spam control has already done, is moving quickly toward commodity pricing status.

    Google has many product lines, so it will be interesting to see how they can serve the market well. Sonian has chosen to focus on archiving, information access and mining the dark data stored in email for actionable intelligence that customers want from their communication data.

    — Greg Arnette

  2. Posted April 3, 2009 at 1:10 PM | Permalink

    Snippit of information from Proofpoint’s Paul LaPorte…

    Here’s a bit of Google gossip I confirmed by checking the web site.

    I learned from a twitter user that Google dropped its entry level email security service ($3/user/year) and now only provides the $12/user/year option. This user now needed to find a new vendor as a 400% jump at renewal time was unappealing.

  3. Posted April 6, 2009 at 2:03 PM | Permalink

    From a source that wishes anonymity:

    The implications and ramifications, of Google not correcting historical content that Google has been informed has been retracted/corrected elsewhere or Google not correcting content that is generally accepted as incorrect by most if not all reasonable parties involved, makes Google hit-list reads like a Russian newspaper! Great stories, but you don’t know which are true and which are not, even though Google may “know” (because they have been told) and opts to not pass that little associated “fact” along. “Correcting History” is NOT censoring content, if it is suppressing content that is untrue, or at a minimum giving people the “option” to suppress content that Google has been told and knows is untrue.

    If information “content” providers, pages that Google indexes, would ALSO correct or somehow be able to avoid Google wasting time indexing invalid content, that would help all concerned. (Good luck with THAT!) Odds are, incorrect information can and will be picked up, even if “known” to be false by all concerned. And there is NO WAY to “correct” this if an individual’s reputation is damaged by this content. NO WAY except for anyone who has had their personal or business reputation tarnished erroneously, and repeated endlessly and incessantly, over and over, in “Google Hit Lists” attempting to correctly answer a query with invalid data, known to be invalid. And the individual or business has no way to erase that! Hey, this is America. That just isn’t right.

    Google’s inventory of pages searched and reported on is probably only 20% of all public web pages out there from the deep web. If you’re unfortunate enough, to have something WRONG on that subset of webpages Google has “cherry-picked” to index in their choice of what subset of pages to include, then some information will stay out there forever that is damaging to your, your business, or even to someone’s personal reputation! I personally don’t want to “see” content known to be invalid and therefore known not connected to the “search” inquiry result set, so it doesn’t belong in the “Hit-List”! To report it back to me, when that content is “known” not to be valid, wastes my time looking through the “hit-list” and continues to hurt that person’s personal privacy and reputation even when known ahead of time to be wrong. Doesn’t make sense to keep returning it. Yet there is no way to get Google to remove it today it seems, it just repeats gossip it hears in its wanderings on the sites it chooses to visit, and passes that content along as often as it s algorithm chooses.

    I don’t want to “see” gossip that is later found to be “untrue”. Some folks might, so if Google insists on “cherry-picking” that invalid fact to return fine, but everyone’s friends and future employers all should not see that incorrect information content displayed by default if “known” to be untrue. There’s enough clutter to sift through, without adding in more junk, known to be false, but not scored nor reported as such.

    At least give me an option to suppress content that folks have demonstrated is invalid with a high-degree of confidence, but Google opts to leave in anyway perhaps thinking it is useful in doing so.

    “Bi-Temporal” databases have had mechanisms to incorporate retroactive “corrections” to history, when historical content was found to be obsolete or untrue, since the last century (Date; Snodgrass).

    Come ON Google, get with this millennium, apply common “Bi-Temporal” Database techniques, and correct bad and invalid content in so it is at least filtered from default returned hit-lists!

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment. To comment, first join our community.