Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 5th Jan 2013 14:53 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 547431
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Proves me right.
by unoengborg on Sun 6th Jan 2013 13:05
in reply to "RE[2]: Proves me right. "
"Well duh... Though it might force Microsoft to implement open standards.
But if Google cared about open standards they would of took it out of all their products but they didn't. They kept it in their paid products.
"
Google is a business and need to support their existing customers, so they keep it in their paid products. Not having it for free will create an incentive to create better solutions.
RE[4]: Proves me right.
by Windows Sucks on Sun 6th Jan 2013 14:24
in reply to "RE[3]: Proves me right. "
Google is a business and need to support their existing customers, so they keep it in their paid products. Not having it for free will create an incentive to create better solutions.
Right so you would think they would want to move their customers to a better solution if there was one.
So they are saying that DAV is not good enough for their business customers. If it was they could transition them off active sync since they have consultants working with most of their business customers.
Fact is Active sync is the best solution if you want blackberry like sync connected to Google Apps in the enterprise.
That open standards talk is BS.





Member since:
2005-11-10
Well a lot of people argued it was all about open standards and had nothing to do with punishing MS.
But if Google cared about open standards they would of took it out of all their products but they didn't. They kept it in their paid products.
Open standards my booty. They know active sync works better then DAV services and for sure is more easy to use so they kept it for their business customers.
It's just punishment for MS. Lol.