Google is crazy make it stop it is taking over!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

I run a news organization and although we may not replace our desktop applications tomorrow we find the Google applications to be invaluable for our writers in the field and the ability to collaborate on an article and to write from anyway even if they do not have their lap tops.

The price is right also.
I say keep up the good work Google. You own my desktop from search to news to docs and other applications. I have stopped using Explorer bookmarks and now use bookmarks in Google homepage.

It is the ultimate for the mobile person.

PS 25 years ago when I wrote for technology publicatons I wrote, "No thinking manager would replace their Wang word processor with a PC.
(If you do not know what Wang is then look it up)

If Google wants to really change the computing world, then it should make it possible for the new offerings to integrate easily with free softwear. In that way they could tap into the enormous creative potential out there in the general public. That would parallel what Wikipedia has done. Would consumers then keep buying an expensive "black box" of softwear from Microsoft?

After reviewing the free version I can say that do not try running any macros or Spreedsheet fitlers, because they simply do not work yet and once can not turn them on.

Google doesnt know what to do with its billions.

Web-based office suite... God Help us.

But then again, trust not what google gives away to download.

As the Tech Coordinator for a small rural school I am very interested in Google Docs and Spreadsheets. The students in my district are poor and don't have the money to spend on software. My district doesn't have the funding to provide a productivity suite for every teacher so things like this or OpenOffice are very important to making education affordable.

Combined with Google's alliance with Sun earlier this year, does this mean that Mozilla is next on Google's shopping list? If so, can we expect a Google-OS by 2010? I'm getting shivers just thinking about it.

...

"Collaboration was
meant to happen in
real time"

...

Sadly, PC_Fool (aka John Karr) is thinking of
"collaboration" with cute pre-adolescent girls
in sexy Catholic school uniforms !

The JonBonet Syndrome.

PC_Fool needs to go back to Microsoft High School
in Philadelphia for re-programming.

All the little turd thinks about is sex with minors !

...

The Computer Rodent

...

"Share a file /
Get a date with
PC_Fool !"

...

/sarcasm nice to see Betanews living up to own rules

"Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated."

Sadly, the baseless, disgusting, and pointless vomit spewing from your keyboard will no doubt be left up here for all time as Betanews ignores it's own comment system. I can only hope that the new "persona" your using is because someone at Betanews finally did listen to the crap coming out of you and banned PC Rat and that a new ban is forthcoming...

Go away.

Wow.

You can't take a hint, can you?

Every comment modded down, alias suspended, and yet the bRat returns to spread more of his special brand of retard humor.

Dude, you're an idiot. Everyone here knows it. Do you enjoy promoting the fact that you've got the maturity level of a 5 year-old?

You're not funny. (except to others with your limited mental capacity)

You're not clever, intelligent, or insightful.

As Wincement said, Go away. No-one wants you here.

...

"Google is just
playing with
Microsoft's mind"

...

Maybe. Or, perhaps, Google thinks this has some
possible commercial value. Or just that Google
has tons of cash it don't know what to do with.

Bottom line: It's a gimmick that's going nowhere.

If Google has so much money it don't know what
else to do, it ought to buy out BetaNews for a
few billion dollars.

Then the owner of BetaNews could show his
appreciation to the PC Rat for past journalistic
contributions by giving Raticus some of that
money. Even donate some so PC_Fool can have
that sex change operation he has always wanted !

But an on-line word processor ? Gimme a break !
Everybody has MS Write on their comuter already.

...

The Computer Rodent

...

Go away.

Man, not only are you the dumbest asshat I've ever met, but you're apparently completely oblivious tot he fact that you are commiting a crime.

After the recent fuss about the page the kids put up on MySpace about their principle, one might think twice about posting lies about people you know *nothing* about.

I gotta wonder where the hell your parents are. I gotta wonder how they so miserably failed to instill any actual humanity in you. And I gotta wonder how long it will be before you get a court order to shut the bloody hell up.

Two days, two developments. I know the web-centric world moves fast, but Google just punched it into overdrive. First, they bought YouTube. Wether you think it was investment or not, this much is certain. It signals a s*** in Google's strategy. Over the last year Google has furiously released products, to mixed reviews. Buying YouTube shows they have "manned up", and realized that other companies have better products, so why re-invent the wheel, when it can just be bought.

The second s*** came today, when Google combined Writely & Google Spreadsheets into Google Docs & Spreadsheets. Last week Google said they were going to stop releasing new products & services, just for sake of releasing them. Instead Google said they were going to focus on improving their existing products, and it only took them a week. They have also refocused the efforts of their engineers to tweak their world class serch engine

Now compare that to Microsoft. Over three years ago Microsoft announced their "Trustworthy Computing" initiative. Talk about a load of hot steaming bullsoft. Microsoft's current software is as buggy as ever and the new software still hasn't made it out the door. Meanwhile, Microsoft dives head first into the security software and portable document business. Major bullsoft. All this after rebranding/repackaging/renaming many existing software services under the "Windows Live" brand. Notice I didn't say improving.

So, Google's strategy it seems, is to focus on existing products to strengthen them and to buy companies that compliment their company. Microsoft's strategy is to rebrand/repackage/rename their existing average/over priced software, and hope that no one notices they really don't have a strategy.

In my first blog article, I wrote about the Long, Slow Death of Microsoft. Prophetic? Visonary? Not really. Millions hold the same opinion, and that number grows daily. But over the last few days it may prove I've miscalculated. Maybe it's not going to be the Long. Slow Death of Microsoft. The web-centric world is speeding along, and Microsoft is just a deer in the headlights.

I'm Guessing ©2006

The google word processor and spreadsheet programs work. I find however they are not perfect of course. I guess I never really tried it seriously and did a school paper on it. I hope they improve it because I think www.thinkfree.com is a much better online office suite or else www.openoffice.org.

As for microsoft ability and reputation. I think it is in the toilet. Vista is a 5 year evolutionary upgrade that should of taken 2 years. Linux and mac os have had countless updates and are still far more advanced then vista is. Office 2007 is nothing more then that as well, evolutionary and its been 4 years since the last release. They are rolling out services via windows live to play catch up with all the big dogs like google search, you tube, myspace etc. The sad thing is the fail horribly with every one of these new products. If microsoft was a start up they would of been bankrupt long ago. But because they have the os market locked down as well as office they don't have much to worry about at least not in the short term. They have the cash and mediocre substandard products to meet demand and because people don't do research or try alternatives first they just go with what microsoft pays third party research firms for their answer.

The really sad thing is with all the competition and word to mouth on opensource with linux and office programs microsoft still has yet to see sales drop in fact their sales are increasing. I think the oem's and general public just do not know better and are the main people feeding the beast. Everyone knows computers run windows and to write a paper or a letter on the computer you need ms office. To surf the web you need ie. I mean heck ask anyone on the street if they know about linux. They will say oh yeah, that is that really hard to use os for nerds. Little do they know it looks and acts just like windows at least in the gui mode. But the thing about it, the install is push button easy if you have common name brand components from your printer to your sound card/video card your good to go. It will boot straight into a desktop with a start button and applications commonly used ready to go. openoffice.org firefox web browser network is already to go just start working. But of course anything more advanced like installing a new program or a new driver is nightmare but it s getting better with rpm or other install managers.

No one knows there are alternatives.

I think the writers and analysts totally miss the point here. The ease of which a person can share data in a ad-hoc work group is tremendous. I have a business that relies heavily on 1099 workers -- with G-spreadsheets I have easily done scheduling, reporting, and now with G-Docs I will be able to instantly be able to issue bulletins -- our world is about connectivity and communication G-software does it -- where sending attached files is now a thing of the past in many of my daily chores. While G-Software may not eliminate my using MS Office products -- I now have a choice.

While it's nice to be able to access your docs and an editor from damn near anywhere, it's getting to be a pain in the a** for window management.

I often have Word and Excel open at that same time. Browsing Google Docs with two windows?

Gah...

I don't think browsers were built to be application clients.

"I don't think browsers were built to be application clients."

No, but they make for easy collaboration.

Collaboration was meant to happen in real time. Any facsimile of real-time collaboration within a browser is nothing but a kludge.

By your definition.

*laughs*

Christ, whatever you do, don't try to convinvce me your definition is better than mine by actually...

*gasp*

...explaining it, or anything...

Without modification such as flash or java, a browser can only poll (refresh) periodically at *best*. How on Earth is that collaborative by *anyone's* definition?

If you're going to try and argue a point, at least provide some detail. "By your definition" isn't an argument, it's a cop-out, and a bad one at that.

How does your definition differ from mine, then, if by yours it's a real-time collaborative tool.

"I don't think browsers were built to be application clients."

They may not have initially been built to support this but have become very great for application clients. It has been the trend for a while now. There hundreds/thousands of applications that replaced there fat client with a thin client (web front end). It makes a lot more sense in a corporate environment. When rolling out new applications it’s as easy as adding a link on your company intranet.

A true client requires two-way communication. Only browsers with modifications (Flash or Java, etc) are capable of this to a limited degree.

So you've got a browser *and* a plugin now. Efficient? Elegant? Secure or well designed for it's current use? Not even close.

I never said adding applications wasn't easy, I said the client was not designed for it. Big difference.

I wasn't aware javascript was a plugin. :)

Collaboration does not mean real time, that is by your definition. Your statement is not fact, so it is your definition. "By your definition" is a statement and needs no explanation because collaboration does not mean real time, fact. How is a true statement a cop-out?

"Collaboration was meant to happen in real time."

Who was the person that meant for collaboration to be real time? Is there some inventor that documented this? If so, people have been using the term collaboration incorrectly for a long time, you should make sure to correct them.

I also never said real time, I said collaboration, which does not necessarily mean real time as explained above.

It is two way communication. You can click, type or do just about anything a fat client can do. You get output from the webserver and you can interact with it to send data back.

"Browsing Google Docs with two windows?"

Tabbed browsing should fix that. If your using firefox your already set, if your using explorer the next version will support it.

To a degree you are correct that the application development is not quite as easy (though very close), however in many many cases the benefits far outweigh the downsides.

As an example, A driving factor of my company moving its current app client to a browser instead of a fat client was the rollout of a new version. Instead of requiring every user on the system (hundreds) to get and install the latest client, we just update the server and were done. No muss, no fuss, and everyone gets the update at the same time. There are other reasons around security, and stability as well.

That said...there are cases where the opposite is true. There are certain things that are not as feature rich as we would like because the benefits of those features are not outweighed by the difficulties posed in making it a webapp, but in our case those features didn't exist in the old client either so no biggie.

In most cases you are correct that its just as good, however there are cases where that is not the case. One thing that comes to mind is real time chat (like IM) Ajax can somewhat solve the problem but your client will never be as good as one that can sit in the windows tray.

Javascript doesn't change the fact that the browser has to refresh in order for the data to refresh.

Ajax doesn't cut it. It's still a poor substitute.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying AJAX sucks. I'm simply saying that were putting a lot of effort into making something work in ways it was never intended. It seems to me that it would be far easier to concentrate on perhaps starting from scratch on something designed for two-way communication.

Wow.

You do know what collaboration is, right? Working *together*?

If you are forced to manually update, you're not working together. You're working alone with the help of someone else's data.

Fact.

Tabs suck within an application that you actually do *work* in. What if I need to share data bettween the two windows? Tabs isn't going to make that any easier.

Google has proved that real time chat can work through a browser. Try gtalk, I have been using that for a while and never install the fat client anymore. There is no reason too.

Learning the key board short cuts for switching tabs and copy and paste make it a breeze. I think you should give it another shot. Wants you get used to it you will never go back.

That may work for you. That in no way means it will or should work for anyone, or even the vast majority. It also does not make it the 'right' way to do things.

Wrong

All I was saying was to give it a shot, there is never one right way in this field. There are many ways, I was just recommending one.

No, he's absolutely right. Unless the server can also communicate directly to the client without any action needed from the client, true collaboration does not exist, at least not in its most ideal form.

I have, it's good but a poor substitute for, say, trillian if your looking for a true feature set.

What happens when my internet connection is lost while composing a document? (Although like Gmail, I think Writely saves a draft every few seconds.)

Also, Joe Wilcox isn't credible when he thinks small some businesses would adopt this. No one would be fool enough to toss their company correspondence and documents online through the prevalent browser insecurities that exist. At best a very small percentage of 1st graders or individuals might use Google Office once in a blue moon. Otherwise, sanity suggests you use a desktop application. OpenOffice is just as free, ten-thousand times better, a whole lot faster, and doesn't come with an account that is tracked by a megacorp.

People said that about email at one time, too.

No-one?

lmao...

Why do you think IM worms are so spectacularly successful? People are MORONS. Have you ever worked with a sales manager? A Marketing CEO? These buffoons would eat it up and beg for more if they heard one person tell them it could improve their sales.

Touchè PC_Tool, touchè.

Yea, and remember how stupid Bill Gates looked trying to defend his emails in court? No good ever comes from making your business — personal or commercial — public.

Joe Wilcox never said that small businesses would adopt this, but he pointed out that a number have moved to Google's hosted Gmail solution and Google Calendar. Years ago, moving your small business e-mail to a Web based solution (Yahoo, Hotmail) would have been a joke -- now it's a reality (even with your 'megacorp' concerns).

When the technology improves, an online productivity suite isn't out of the question, especially with regards to collaboration and costs for small businesses, which can't afford $700 copies of Office. Obviously, OpenOffice is a more realistic choice for the time being.

There are many instances I can think of where a large corporation could benefit from an online collaborative document such as allowed by these apps. In fact, for my next project I think I am going to try it. We have issues constantly with keeping documents such as report listings up to date during project builds because one person will have it open, overwrite a newer copy, or something of that sort.

In this case when multiple people are accessing a document everyone is aware and they can talk to each other while making changes. This could save a lot of headaches and get people to keep up on their documentation instead of waiting until it is unlocked for editing, in which case they usually forget to go back and make the changes.

No, no...the PC says touche and doesn't get it, the Mac get's it and tries to explain it and fails.

See, in *this* instance, *you're* the PC.

You are 100% right. The fact that this damned company now becomes in charge of everything starting from my mail, to calendar, searching, now my documents and spreadsheets..... eveyrthing i do has now a digital foot print. I think most people should wake up and say "F that". On demand applications should be out there, but my data is my property. I hate to think this one company has access to millions of peoples private lives, and now their businesses.

Just wanted to jump in here........I've read comment after comment -- the problem is not with the software it's with the people. Most people's data isn't valuable -- so why what is the big deal -- you all want to glow about the principle of it. I have projects that normally run for a week at a time. If I'm using 15 different indie contractors it's far easier for me to do a single posting of a spreadsheet -- easily enroll even novice computer users -- rather than a bunch of emails each time I make a change -- talk abt security -- why would i want to invite people that only have a casual connection to my business access to my company servers -- in fact I have no company servers.

What is the big deal with some companies robots scanning your documents in order to rip-off some slob by selling an "Adword" -- it is passive. Problem with "gearheads" they have very limited vision -- you wouldn't make a very good software visionary -- but I bet you'd be first in line with an opinion.

Do I expect Coca Cola to use this G-software, no, however Google's business model succeeded by usurping convention and open the playing field to the public. Searching is free to use, software is free to use, photo archiving is free to use, distribution of video is free to use -- so there are "freakin ads" on my page -- guess what, there's also raisins in my cereal -- I'm not crazy abt raisins but I love those "flakes."

Not the point - consider though what should happen if a government entity (or even just a competitor in a civil lawsuit) decides they want to see all the documents on a server as part of discovery?

Unless Google et al supports full encryption so that only you can see your document, I can't imagine anyone wanting to put anything serious up there.

--->What is the big deal with some companies robots scanning your documents in order to rip-off some slob by selling an "Adword" -- it is passive.

OpenOffice is going to take the educational community by storm. As the tech coordinator for a small school I don't have tens of thousands of dollars to outfit PC's with Microsoft. OOo does what I want and with a little training and familiarity people will make the switch with no problem. Google Docs is just going to make sharing and transporting easier.