November 26, 2013
Executive Summary
The Information Technology Committee has completed an evaluation of whether to move from our current Mirapoint email and Meeting Maker calendar software to an integrated cloud based system. The two systems reviewed were Google Apps for Education and Microsoft Office 365. The ITC recommends that we make the move from Mirapoint/Meeting Maker to Google Apps for Education. This document describes the factors that went into our decision and the process that we followed. The committee is in unanimous agreement that the College should move from the local
Mirapoint/Meeting Maker environments to “The Cloud.” Vendor support for Mirapoint has diminished while costs are escalating based on increased storage demands by faculty and staff in addition to ongoing maintenance costs. The current mail and calendar do not integrate with each other and the calendar does not integrate with mobile devices. Having Google manage mail and calendar would allow OIT staff to focus on other pressing projects.
ITC considered the issues of privacy, security and reliability very carefully. Jeff Jones reviewed both contracts and sees no red flags in these areas. Both products have guaranteed that they do not mine data in the education domains for anything other than improving usability. Neither product displays advertisements in its education domain. Both are FERPA compliant. Only Microsoft is HIPAA compliant, but this is not a concern here at Williams. Google services are contracted to be up 99.9% of the time which is deemed acceptable by the committee. Google also guarantees security for all its facilities and has teams of staff who do nothing but monitor systems to keep them secure.
Following field-‐testing of Google and Microsoft cloud-‐based systems, ITC discussed the strengths of each product and recognizes that either product could be used well on the Williams campus. We discovered that many in the Williams community are already using Gmail and Google Docs, and some departments are already using Google calendar. When faculty and staff collaborate with colleagues at other schools, Google is the more common platform. Many people on campus are familiar with Gmail and Google calendar in their non-‐work lives as well. Finally, the committee felt that Google has more platform independence and is therefore more suited to Macs and other non-‐Windows devices.
The committee recommends that work on this transition begin as soon as possible. OIT staff will need several months to plan all the details for the implementation and migration including the technical implementation, training, and thorough communication with all constituents on campus. Planning and testing will most likely take place through March, if not April, given the number of decisions to be made and details to attend to. Tentatively, it is possible that students and most offices might move by the end
of the summer of 2014 and faculty in the fall of 2014. The timeline is dependent on what is discovered as a result of the research during the planning phase.
The committee also recognizes that this work will be done on top of an already full load for OIT staff. We urge the College to give OIT the budget and staff resources needed to make the project a success. These may include consultants or backfill staff, an implementation partner and /or training assistance. We do not want the project to suffer for lack of resources.
The Information Technology Committee appreciates your consideration and we look forward to your decision.
Information Technology Committee Members
Henry Art, chair
Faculty: Jason Josephson, Bill Lenhart, David Morris Staff: Todd Hoffman, Mary Morrison
Ex Officio: David Pilachowski, Dinny Taylor, Chris Winters Students: Rebecca Lewis, Ryan Buchanan
Definitions, Process and Details
Definition of the Services in a Williams College Domain
ITC reviewed both the Google and Office 365 offerings carefully. There are very specific applications that are covered by both education contracts. ITC looked at the products in each suite. The education contracts guarantee better protection for privacy and no advertisements in the core products. Using either company, current users would keep their existing @williams.edu email address. With either company, some aspects of the email system will still be maintained on campus so that we can manage when accounts will be added or terminated.
The core applications that come with the signing of the central contract include:
Function Google Office 365
Email Gmail Outlook
Calendar Calendar Calendar
Contact List Contacts Contacts
Storage Drive SkyDrive
Word Processing Docs Word
Spreadsheets Sheets Excel
Presentations Slides PowerPoint
Web Pages Sites SharePoint
IM Talk Lync
Commercial applications like Google+, YouTube, Blogger, Skype etc. are not part of the core suite. One cannot sign into the commercial applications using the Williams email address unless Williams has made an individual decision to allow that app to be part of the Williams domain. Even if the College decides to allow an application to be part of the Williams domain so people can log in using their @williams.edu email, the guarantees in the education contract for full privacy and no advertisements do not apply.
Process and Decision Factors
In the winter/spring of 2013 the Information Technology Committee in conjunction with the Office for Information Technology began investigating potentially replacing the existing Mirapoint email system and Meeting Maker calendar system with cloud based services. Office 365 and Google Apps for Education were the solutions that were researched. This investigation was prompted by the following factors:
• The Mirapoint email system is 5 years old and was acquired by Critical Path. Support was noticeably poorer for the last upgrade.
• Maintenance costs go up each year and they system requires about .3 FTE to manage. (Upgrades require outside help as well.)
• There is no integration between mail and calendar, and poor calendar integration with mobile devices.
• Email storage servers were upgraded in 2011 assuming that storage would last 3 years. In 2012 those servers needed an additional upgrade as Faculty/Staff email storage now requires 3 terabytes (3000 GB). If growth continues as it has, storage will need to be increased in 2015. The major criteria considered for a potential solution included
• Meets the criteria in the features matrix created by ITC
• Reliability
• Privacy
• Security
• Interoperability (e.g. calDAV compliance)
• Usability
In addition to the criteria listed above additional considerations were
• Peer institution adoption
• Mobile device integration
• Platform independence
Winter/Spring 2013
OIT conducted a survey in January of 2013 of 62 CLAC (Consortium of Liberal Arts Colleges) and their current email and calendaring systems for Faculty/Staff and Students and interviewed schools regarding their experiences in transitioning to cloud based email and calendar systems. Of the 62 CLAC schools, 61% had migrated their Faculty/Staff to cloud based systems and 69% had migrated their student mail to cloud based systems. Of those who had migrated ~85% had migrated to Google Apps for Education and ~15% had migrated to Office 365. (See Appendix C.) ITC then spent much of the spring refining an evaluation matrix of 146 criteria for a replacement email and calendar system setting the target of Fall 2013 for an evaluation.
Fall 2013
• OIT brought in consultants from other schools to discuss their experiences transitioning to a cloud based system with ITC and OIT. The consultants also determined whether the system their schools were using met the 146 criteria in the matrix. While neither system met every single criterion, both met almost all of them and the committee determined that the two products are equal in features.
o Mt Holyoke experiences with Google implementation o Dartmouth experiences with Office 365 implementation
• OIT established a core project team consisting of Maggie Koperniak from Administrative Information Systems as Project Manager, Ashley Frost from Networks and Systems, Lynna Jackson from Instructional Technology and Michael Newton from Desktop Systems.
• OIT participated in a Google Hangout with both the Google Apps for EDU product strategy manager and the sales representative for EDU products. (We also benefit from the product strategy manager being a 2004 graduate of Williams who has taken extra interest in our conversion.)
• Competitive Computing (a Microsoft partner company) came to campus to give an overview of Microsoft Office 365 to improve our understanding of the product suite.
• Williams community comments were sought via Daily Messages and faculty meeting announcements.
• A general evaluation was launched of both Google Apps and Microsoft 365. Participants were members of ITC, OIT and various administrative offices.
• Four calendar specific evaluation sessions were held with high volume users of Meeting Maker from various administrative and academic offices.
General Evaluation Process
All members of ITC, a subset of OIT staff, and volunteers from various administrative offices were assigned accounts in both the Google environment and Office 365 environment. Additionally the lab in Jesup 207 was set up to have all potential email and calendar desktop clients on them to allow for testing the solutions without impacting individuals’ personal workstations. The OIT core project team was available to aid ITC members and others in their testing the cloud-‐based email systems. Six individuals had their college email migrated to their test accounts in both systems and issued test laptops in order to evaluate performance with large volume inboxes, folders, etc.. Evaluators exercised system functionality, tested usability features and tried out the collaboration features offered by these two solutions.
Calendar Evaluation Process
In addition to the general evaluation, the calendars in both solutions were vetted by 36 high volume Meeting Maker users. Four separate calendar specific sessions were held in the lab where the
functionality in each system was presented and then attendees were allowed hands-‐on time to test and collaborate with the other evaluators in the lab.
Community Feedback, Survey and Evaluation Results
The general community comments received after the Daily Message and the faculty meeting announcements had a Google bias. We assume this was because more people had prior experience with Gmail than with Office 365. The evaluations demonstrated that both products have similar
functionality and that both met the requirements set forth in the ITC matrix. The surveys done after the evaluations of those who participated were much more even than the general comments. Ninety percent of the people who tested felt that they could work with either product. While there was a slight
preference for Google, a significant portion preferred Microsoft or had no preference. (See Appendices A and B for the email and calendar testing survey results.)
Product Comparison
The following table shows the core comparison between the two products. Green rows indicate features of the two products that are essentially the same for our purposes. The red rows highlight the
differences between products. Google does better for some features and Office 365 does better in others. In reviewing the changes in these products in the past few years, it is apparent that they “leap-‐ frog” each other and change services regularly to be better than the other one. This chart is a current snapshot.
Google Office 365
Guaranteed availability of at least 99.9% 99.9% Uptime Service Level Agreement
No advertising No advertising
FERPA Compliant & Registered with the US-‐EU Safe Harbor Agreement
Compliant with FERPA, HIPAA, Gramm Leach Bliley Act, US-‐EU Safe Harbor Agreement
Does not own your data Does not own your data Does not mine or access your data except for
operations improvement
Does not mine or access your data except for operations improvement
Max email attachment 25 MB Max email attachment 25 MB Optional eDiscovery available for an additional
cost Optional eDiscovery available for an additional cost Storage: 30 GB Storage: 50 GB in Outlook + 25 GB SkyDrive Search available in Calendar Search not available in Calendar
Full-‐text search in Drive No full-‐text search in SkyDrive No seamless integration with web versions of
Office products Seamless integration with web versions of Office products Data is stored in global data centers Data is guaranteed to be stored in U.S.
Summary of How ITC Came to the Decision
At our 19 November meeting, each member of the committee articulated his/her rationale for whether Williams should migrate to a cloud solution and why s/he would recommend one product over the other including a list of strengths and weaknesses of each product. The consensus of the committee was that although both products satisfy the criteria set forth previously, the campus was largely ‘voting with their feet’ already. Some departments on campus are currently actively using Google calendar and Gmail. Google Apps for Education has been heavily adopted by peer institutions which offers the opportunity for future collaboration with colleagues at other schools and also indicates a measure of acceptance in the greater landscape. There is a general familiarity of the Google cloud-‐based applications among students, faculty and staff which would allow for an easier transition. The committee also felt that Google is more platform-‐independent and therefore more adaptable to Macs and other non-‐Windows
devices. Desktop clients such as Outlook and MacMail can still be used by end users, which will also reduce the learning curve in the community. Google has a history of being innovative and progressive with ongoing development. They are a major player among technology companies and will continue to innovate in ways that will have major benefits for Williams in the future.
Projected Timeline
If this recommendation is approved by senior staff, the projected timeline would be to use December, 2013 through March or April, 2014 to complete the planning and testing for the implementation. There will need to be simultaneous workgroups for Technical Implementation, Communication and Training. Although the purpose of the preparation is to determine the order and timing of the transition, we anticipate that the complete migration of all Williams email and calendar to Google will happen by the end of calendar year 2014. We can imagine that student accounts could be migrated to the cloud during the summer of 2014 along with many administrative offices followed by the rest of the offices and faculty in the fall 2014, but the research during the planning phase will be more definitive. This will allow sufficient time for thorough planning and testing in order to ensure this transition can be made providing a supportive experience for members of the Williams community with abundant available support and minimal disruption to existing workflow.
Projected Costs
Although the Google Apps for Education suite is advertised as ‘free’ there will be costs associated with the implementation. (This would be the case with either selection.) These needs will be difficult to define until the implementation work groups evaluate the technical and planning issues and these estimates may not be accurate. The three most likely areas for extra help include backfill for staff so they can focus on this project, technical assistance through a migration partner, and assistance to do thorough training.
Backfill: Temporary staff or consultants during the peak of the migration Migration partner for technical implementation
Training partners for extensive workshops and hands-‐on assistance during migration
eDiscovery and Archiving
Google offers an optional product called Google Vault as part of the core suite. Google Vault provides archiving of email for personal benefits and also meets requirements for eDiscovery, the electronic aspect of identifying, collecting and producing electronically stored information in response to a request
for production in a law suit or investigation. Jeff Jones has expressed interest in exploring this. There is a per faculty/staff member monthly charge. Google would then cover students and alumni (if they
remain part of the Williams domain) for free.
Whether or not to purchase and implement Google Vault should be a separate institutional decision. The Information Technology Committee will want to evaluate all the terms, parameters and
consequences of implementing Google Vault. This is outside the purview of this recommendation, but Senior Staff should know that this option is available for discussion.
Alumni
Google allows students who graduate after the implementation to keep their [email protected] addresses permanently inside the Williams College domain. ITC did not venture into a discussion of whether this is a good idea. The Office for College Relations and Senior Staff will need to evaluate this option and make a decision.
Appendices
• Appendix A -‐ General Evaluation Results
• Appendix B -‐ Calendar Evaluation Results
• Appendix C -‐ CLAC Survey Results
• Appendix D -‐ Privacy Myths and Realities
Appendix A-‐ General Evaluation Results
Of the 31 responders, 25 indicated a preference.
Product Not very strong Moderate Very strong Total
Google 3 8 3 14
Office 365 4 1 6 11
Appendix B – Calendar Evaluation Results
Of the 38 responders, 31 indicated a preference.
Product Not very strong Moderate Very strong Total
Google 1 9 9 19 Office 365 1 9 2 12
Appendix C – CLAC Survey Results
CLAC Institution What email system does your institution use for faculty & staff?
What email system does your institution
use for students?
What calendar system does your institution use?
Albion College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Allegheny College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Bates College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Beloit College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Bucknell University Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Colby College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
College of the Holy
Cross Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Connecticut College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Denison University Google Apps Google Apps
Google Apps, Establishing a Master Calendar of events in Dean Evans & Associates product
DePauw University Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Franklin and Marshall
College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps, EMS for campus calendar
Hamilton College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Haverford College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Hope College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Kenyon College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Luther College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Macalester College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Manhattan College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps, localist
Mills College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Mount Holyoke
College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Oberlin College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Occidental College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Ohio Wesleyan
University Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Reed College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Sewanee - U of South Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
St. Olaf College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Trinity University Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Union College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Vassar College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Wellesley College Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Wheaton College
(MA) Google Apps Google Apps Google Apps
Amherst College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange, Drupal
Bowdoin College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Dickinson College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Gettysburg College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Hobart and William
Smith Colleges Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Kalamazoo College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Middlebury College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Pomona College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Exchange, EMS
St. Lawrence
University Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Trinity College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Wabash College Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Exchange
Washington and Lee
University Microsoft Exchange Microsoft Office 365
Microsoft Exchange, Microsoft Office 365
Wesleyan University Microsoft Exchange Google Apps Microsoft Exchange
Whittier College Microsoft Exchange Google Apps Microsoft Exchange
College of Wooster Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365
Lake Forest College Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365
Rhodes College Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365
Skidmore College Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365 Microsoft Office 365
Wheaton College (IL) Microsoft Office 365 Google Apps Microsoft Office 365
Williams College Mirapoint Mirapoint Meeting Maker
Grinnell College
Transitioning from locally-hosted Exchange to Office 365
Transitioning from locally-hosted
Exchange to Office 365
Transitioning from locally-hosted Exchange to Office 365
Bryn Mawr College Zimbra Zimbra Zimbra
Carleton College Zimbra Zimbra Zimbra
Earlham College Zimbra Zimbra Zimbra
Lafayette College Zimbra Zimbra Zimbra, Drupal
Swarthmore College Zimbra Zimbra Zimbra
Washington College Zimbra Zimbra Zimbra
Appendix D – Privacy Myths and Realities
OIT staff researched some of the popular myths about Google, Microsoft and Privacy
Myth
-‐ Microsoft is more secure than Google, particularly with US Government (NSA) snooping of communications.With the recent headlines of NSA tapping into the private fiber-‐optic cables of Google coupled with the Microsoft led media attacks on Google privacy issues, one could easily think that Microsoft is more “secure” than Google.
Sources:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/31/21264223-‐nsa-‐british-‐intelligence-‐secretly-‐tapped-‐into-‐
google-‐yahoo-‐cable-‐links-‐officials-‐say?lite
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2028715/microsoft-‐steps-‐up-‐scroogle-‐campaign-‐against-‐google-‐with-‐
advocacy-‐twist.html
Reality
-‐ According to recently leaked government files; Microsoft began cooperating with the USgovernment to provide user data 2 years before Google did. Also, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has singled Google out this year by saying, “In the category of protecting user privacy in the courts, Google deserves special recognition this year for challenging a National Security Letter.”
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Prism_slide_5.jpg
https://www.eff.org/who-‐has-‐your-‐back-‐2013
Myth
-‐
But can’t we avoid NSA snooping altogether if we keep our data locally?Reality
-‐
If NSA has targeted a Williams College individual for special “investigation”, Williams Collegecannot prevent NSA access of your data.
Myth
-‐
Google mines all your data making it publically available.People hear that Google mines user data in order to “monetize” it. On hearing this, a reasonable person could easily assume that this means Google sells the data to the highest bidder.
Reality
-
In their free, commercial Google offerings, Google’s computer search algorithms are applied to your data in order to target advertisements specifically to you while you are using Google services.Source:
http://www.npr.org/2012/03/01/147741213/data-‐mining-‐does-‐online-‐privacy-‐matter
In the Google Apps for Education product, which Williams would be a part of, advertisements are turned off and Google does not mine user data for any other purpose then to ensure the reliability and usability of the system.
Myth
-‐ Google servers are easier to hack then Williams College servers.Reality
-‐ There are over 250 individual Google staff members who have been specifically trained in ITsecurity and spend all their time working to improve the security of Google systems. Williams College simply can’t compete with the Google security team.
Source:
https://cloud.google.com/files/Google-‐CommonSecurity-‐WhitePaper-‐v1.4.pdf
Myth
-‐ But wait, isn’t Google a bigger target and therefore more attractive?Reality
-‐ Security experts, in looking at the data, tell us that the trend in cybercrime is now to targetsmaller entities because they are easier to hack.
Source:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/22/smallbusiness/small-‐business-‐cybercrime/
Simply stated, if you as an individual are targeted because someone wants your data, then your data is safer on computers managed by Google or Microsoft then it is here on Williams College servers.
