• On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
February 25, 2009 11:32 AM PST

Google Gmail outage compensation: $2.05 per user

by Stephen Shankland
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 11 comments

If your business used Gmail and the service went out for two and a half hours, do you think you lost $2.05 per user in productivity?

That's the monetary equivalent of what Google offered to compensate Google Apps Premier Edition customers after Gmail was unavailable for about two and a half hours on Tuesday. And it was being generous: All it had to offer was the equivalent of 41 cents per user.

(Credit: CNET Networks / Josh Lowensohn)

For customers who pay the $50 per user per year price for the Google Apps service, Google strives to keep it up and running 99.9 percent of the time each month. According to the Google Apps service level agreement (SLA), Google promises three extra days of service if availability slips down to the 99 to 99.9 percent range.

According to a Gmail outage blog posting by Gmail site reliability manager Acacio Cruz, the outage lasted "approximately two and a half hours." By my math, assuming there were no other outages in February, that means uptime of 99.63 percent for the month.

However, Google decided to extend affected customers' service more than the 3 days the SLA required. "Given the extent of the outage and as a gesture of goodwill, we are extending their service for 15-days," spokesman Andrew Kovacs said in a statement. Ordinarily the service has to slip below 95 percent uptime to provide a 15-day extension.

So how does that math work out exactly? Well, at $50 a year, Google charges a rate of 0.57 cents per hour. So a three-day extension is the equivalent of 41 cents of revenue per user, and a 15-day extension is worth $2.05.

Before you judge, bear in mind some of the factors at play--how essential e-mail is to a company, how common Gmail outages actually are, the time of day of the outage, whether e-mail was available through other software such as Outlook even though Gmail's Web interface was down. And another relevant comparison is how reliable your own company's e-mail servers are. You're in effect valuing your employees' e-mail productivity lower than Google does if you have worse uptime than Gmail.

However, whenever Google is apologizing for outages, the company takes pains to mention it feels the pain acutely given how the company uses Gmail internally. My suspicion is that the company values its employees' time a bit more highly than what it grants Google Apps Premier customers.

Google also offered an explanation of what happened on another blog post.

"This morning, there was a routine maintenance event in one of our European data centers. This typically causes no disruption because accounts are simply served out of another data center," Cruz said. "Unexpected side effects of some new code that tries to keep data geographically close to its owner caused another data center in Europe to become overloaded, and that caused cascading problems from one data center to another. It took us about an hour to get it all back under control."

Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank.
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (11 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by tmblsn February 25, 2009 12:53 PM PST
"Well, at $50 a year, Google charges a rate of 0.57 cents per hour."

Based on what?

$50/365 is ~$0.14/day.

To base this on a 'standard' 2080 hour work-year, the cost is $0.024 per work-hour.
Reply to this comment
by havenoregrets February 25, 2009 1:29 PM PST
Bad mojo and Dave beat me to the punch. I haven't even had my coffee yet, and I'm still more awake than you.
by Shankland February 25, 2009 5:35 PM PST
@dave421sol below agreed with my math, but you do have a fair point about work hours. However, given that the SLA measures total hours, and that many services and companies are global and running round the clock, I think it's more reasonable to use the entire 24 hours a day. Which 40-hour work week would you pick?
by badmojo42 February 25, 2009 1:18 PM PST
should be .00571 cents per hour. get your math right.
Reply to this comment
by dave421sol February 25, 2009 1:22 PM PST
$50 / 365 days / 24 hours = $0.0057 which is 0.57 cents per hour. Remember that 0.57 cents does NOT equal $0.57. You're comparing dollars to cents. $0.57 is 57 cents. 0.57 cents is ~1/2 a penny.
Reply to this comment
by pkgulvin February 25, 2009 1:37 PM PST
tmblsn's calcs are correct, but they did it based on 40 work hours per week, not all 24 hours in the day and all 7 days of the week. If you're talking about the value of employees' time, that seems like the better metric. If you're talking about how much money Google should refund/extend, then the 24 hour day should be used.

Where did they mix dollars and cents?
Reply to this comment
by whizkid454 February 25, 2009 1:44 PM PST
I knew something was up...
Reply to this comment
by gerrrg February 25, 2009 2:38 PM PST
At $2.05, that's 4.1% back of the $50 per user fee for time that was less than 0.029% offline time.

If you would have given back $50 (or more), I think your business model would fail. Microsoft doesn't pay any of us back for time lost having to reboot from a blue screen. Adobe doesn't pay you back for the flaws in Photoshop CS4.

That's why I think you're dangling a red herring. And I don't get why you have such a sore spot for Google.
Reply to this comment
by sachanta1 February 26, 2009 1:31 PM PST
Microsoft, Adobe also dont sell services; they sell a product that we then use. Also they dont charge a per year pricing for their products (even though they do for things like one care). GMail is a service that the Google is in 100% responsible for delivery. This is similar to not getting paid when you dont show up for work.
by tmblsn February 25, 2009 4:30 PM PST
I stand by my comment.

I'll agree that a 15 day extension is worth $2.05 ($50/365*15). But, 0.57 cents/hour is not realistic.

Perhaps cnet should compensate me for every time that I think I'm going to get a review of a product and only end up with a bunch of ads for where to buy it.
Reply to this comment
by gerrrg February 26, 2009 7:38 PM PST
@sachanta1

MSFT sells website hosting and Adobe sells online training.
Reply to this comment
(11 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement
Click Here

About Webware

Say No to boxed software! The future of applications is online delivery and access. Software is passé. Webware is the new way to get things done.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Webware topics

Firefox hopes to one-up IE with fast graphics

Windows 7 features called Direct2D and DirectWrite will speed up Internet Explorer 9 performance. But Firefox hopes it might retool for the same benefit first.

E-tailers linked to 'scam' blame customers

Priceline, Classmates.com, and Orbitz say customers should read the fine print before complaining about being charged to join loyalty programs they didn't want.

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right