I don't see a reasonable alternative here. Pay for another email/office suite provider, and duplicate all mails and files? Twice the cost and exposure surface just to cover 0.01% of downtime.

Sure, it makes sense for mission critical companies (utilities, emergency services), but I don't think it does for an average company. Especially that you don't take much blame if everyone is down.

Outside of tech and disaster recovery, people _really_ don't understand that some redundancy--in this context--is a good thing.

The idea of paying for a backup system, or even having one on standby for situations like this is just not on people's minds, or if it is, it's simply not affordable because it would cost you too much compared to your competition.

Razor thin margins and generally getting away with it is what makes this work. Until it doesn't.

Email in a large part is just a tool for communication(and mostly low priority at that). Where I work, we have backups: Teams( same) provider, Cellphone ( different provider ) , Landline( different provider)

We had a situation recently where cellphones were down, we switched to landline.

You don't need a 1 to 1 mode backup for everything, just a failover plan.

Unless your company is infrastructure or medical, I doubt they have a backup/failover for loss of power. Or water.

The difference between a distributed system and a monolith is that in a monolith you have some idea what your single point of failure is, but in a distributed system you don't know your dozen single points of failure until they happen in production.