RSSWill Office 2010 put Google Apps in its place?
By Carmi Levy | Published July 13, 2009, 2:50 PM
Welcome back, Microsoft. After a few years of getting your butt kicked by Google, it's nice to see you waking up from your monopolistic slumber. You seem to finally get it that both Windows and Office don't have indefinite or guaranteed futures, and you're willing to hang yourself out over the edge a bit to keep them both relevant.
This week, Office 2010, the new version of Microsoft's productivity suite, is being shown to developers and media this week at the company's Worldwide Partner Conference in New Orleans. It includes browser-based versions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote that should forever banish bitter memories of Microsoft's initially half-hearted online productivity efforts.
Beyond the cosmetic
Microsoft has apparently moved on from making change for change's sake [cough, Office 2007, cough], and now seems to finally recognize that the way we work is changing in an increasingly mobile, broadband-enabled, and collaborative world. The company's three-screens strategy that dictates seamless integration across desktops, browsers and mobile devices signals a merciful break from its historic adherence to the PC.
I'll reserve final judgment until I bring home my spanking new copy sometime next year, but if early indications mean anything, Microsoft is digging beneath the surface and giving us something more fundamental than the software equivalent of a fresh coat of paint.
I like that. There's nothing more yawn-inducing than another evolutionary introduction of an evolutionary product that simply mimics design decisions made 15 or 20 years earlier. In shaking up the very foundation of Office, Microsoft holds out hope that the way we string words together, crunch numbers, inspire others, and stay connected to them will evolve beyond the PC era paradigm of categorized apps on a hard drive and toward truly integrated services wherever they're needed.
Facing new competition
This seeming reawakening couldn't come a moment too soon. Google's gotten a ton of great press for getting the Web services zeitgeist, and for delivering a suite of online apps that, if they don't approach Office for outright functionality, provide a decent subset of features for the right price -- namely, free. Other no-cost alternatives, like OpenOffice.org and Zoho, have also garnered headlines for delivering a near-Office experience without the licensing headaches.
Headlines are one thing, reality is quite another. If these alternatives were as perfect as some claim, we'd all be using them now. Much to the freebie vendors' chagrin, that's not quite how it's worked out. Despite looking like a sleeping, elderly uncle, Office continues to rake in the cash ($16 billion per year) and remains the preferred productivity toolset for at least 80% of businesses. We all may play around with Google Docs, using it for some lightweight note-taking and archiving. But we're still doing the heavy lifting in Office, and sharing the final results as attachments. Web-based tools are a nice complement to the tried and true Office suite, but in their present state of evolution, they're hardly ready to take Microsoft on. Like it or not, the world runs on Office, and slowly growing competition from freebie and Web competitors notwithstanding, this isn't about to change anytime soon.
Of course, it's entirely possible that Microsoft will pull another Vista and dump an under-performing chunk of code on the world. But if it lives up to the early hype, Office 2010 could rank alongside Windows 7 as an example of a leaner, meaner, more relevant Microsoft than we've seen in years.
Last month, I shared a few wishes for Office 2010 in an open letter to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. I'm under no illusion that either Mr. Ballmer, a team of his developers in Redmond, or even the Microsoft campus janitorial staff tracks my every published word and integrates every last suggestion into each subsequent release. But I'm still encouraged to see the suite heading in more or less the same direction I had hoped. Which means a Web interface that recognizes the need to move data seamlessly between environments -- desktop, Web, and mobile -- and a recognition that today's Office alternatives fail miserably in that regard.
Bottom line: The alternatives suck
Which likely explains why I haven't switched my own workflow exclusively over to Google Apps, and have no intention of doing so. Please don't get me wrong: I'm all for collaboration. My Kindergarten teacher taught me how to play nicely with others, and to this day I spend much of my time working interactively with clients and colleagues as we collectively -- and almost always remotely -- work together to turn ideas into finished and publishable products.
To be fair, Google Apps is a decent collaborative toolset that I'd love to use more. Unfortunately, Corporate America hasn't drunk Google's Kool-Aid. So every time I start a new project with enterprise clients and colleagues, I end up talking to myself because corporate IT has no intention of dumping Office, tossing its corporate data into the cloud and having its employees work exclusively within the browser.
Even if I were working alone, I'd expect to get laughed out of the room if I submitted an article as a Google Docs document. Until the world evolves beyond Microsoft's productivity world view, I'm pretty much in a world of my own if I choose to live exclusively in a non-Microsoft, Web app world. Even if more companies and individuals come on board (and there's no sign that they're shifting en masse) I'm also not too keen on having other folks make live changes to something I've worked on for weeks. Call me a Luddite, but there's something comforting about keeping an archival version of a document on a local drive that only I can access and modify. Collaboration is a great way to unleash the power of the collective, but there are limits.
Unlike its wannabe productivity suite competitors, Microsoft has lived both sides of the equation. It wrote the book on desktop-based workflow, and is better positioned than any player (yes, even Google) to marry the way we've always worked to the way we'll work in future. Say what you want about Microsoft, but don't call it irrelevant anymore.
Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.
I will never pay for software when free alternatives are available! When it comes to Microsoft, there is no free, just pay up!.
Online apps only work while the server is running. When it stops, ever-one stops!
You should try SSuite Office for a free office suite.
http://www.ssuitesoft.com/index.htm
Score: 0
|Google crAps are already in place here, nowhere to be found on my PCs. Google is junk, and anyone with half a brain already knows this.
Score: 1
|Google needs to buy Zoho. Their web apps are a lot better than Google Docs.
Score: 0
|They missed the boat on collaborated editing in Excel 2010 but overall 2010 is very very fast on startup. I'm impressed.
Score: 0
|Not having used Google Docs, I won't comment. However, Open Office is less and less unsuitable for everything, and is fully capable of what is needing to be done by 97% of people, at home or at work.
The author forgets to give credit to inertia as a reason why the whole world is not using non-Microsoft products. Too many people are used to 'going with the flow' and will only change when the masses do.
Score: 0
|What moral cowardice. Make the jump. Go Google Docs exclusively for a week and then come back and tell us it "sucks." You should be leading the Docs charge and not the Office counter-offensive. Fight the good fight and tell people what they need to hear and not what they want to hear.
Score: 0
|I've used Google Docs. It does pretty much suck. It has pretty poor usability and the security isn't that great either.
Score: 2
|"Even if I were working alone, I'd expect to get laughed out of the room if I submitted an article as a Google Docs document."
How does one do this? You mean share it? Why not export to ODF or PDF?
Score: -2
|It's too bad Mr. Carmi thinks he'd be "laughed out of the room" if he submitted work on Google Docs. Especially considering how much easier collaborative work is on GDocs...and the fact the GDocs is perfectly willing to save text docs as RTF or in Word format. In fact, if he did work on GDocs, maybe he wouldn't even have to be "in the room" to begin with. :-)
I hope he's not waiting to "bring home a spanking new copy" of GDocs. I guess the shrinkwrap mentality dies hard in pundits.
Score: -1
|MaggieL you have got a good point there, you too fatty.
Let's quote: "Even if I were working alone, I'd expect to get laughed out of the room if I submitted an article as a Google Docs document. Until the world evolves beyond Microsoft's productivity world view, I'm pretty much in a world of my own if I choose to live exclusively in a non-Microsoft, Web app world. Even if more companies and individuals come on board (and there's no sign that they're s***ing en masse)"
No sign? I guess the 59,9 million downloads of OpenOffice.org 3.0 and the 15,8 million and counting downloads of OpenOffice.org 3.1 don't count as mass.
http://marketing.openoff.../marketing_bouncer.html
Mr. Carmi has worked with google docs and discovered a new file format?
GDocs files, please give it a rest Mr. Carmi, you're becoming to look like a stupid retard!
Google Docs can save in ODF, Microsoft Office Formats and PDF. Google Docs does NOT have an own file format!
PDF is not something people would laugh at fast.
You could say that you just are writing something down and you just don't need MS Office.
Yes I know it's hard when you're laughed at but with this kind of response they won't laugh so much the second time you use google docs.
Maybe you should question your knowledge and article's a bit more to write better, proper ones?
Next quote: "But I'm still encouraged to see the suite heading in more or less the same direction I had hoped. Which means a Web interface that recognizes the need to move data seamlessly between environments -- desktop, Web, and mobile -- and a recognition that today's Office alternatives fail miserably in that regard. "
What do you mean moving data seamlessly between environments?
It's going to be Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Windows OS + activex, and Windows Mobile.
That's pretty much the same environment! And it's probably going to have only all the features/ the best look IE for some reason *cough* MS *cough*!
Let's bust the myth about the miserably failing of Office alternatives!
Have you ever heard of Ulteo Virtual Desktop? Guess not, here's the link:
http://www.ulteo.com/home/en/home?autolang=en
It allows to run many applications seamlessly in the browser, also OpenOffice.org!
The programmers have also added collaboration!!
If It goes to slow you can set up something by LAN and use some of your own computers as server to host everything on.
So there is one Office alternative stack that does not miserably fail.
Next time do your homework Mr. Carmi, maybe it's a good idea to write an unbiased article about a comparison of Ulteo Virtual Desktop with Ulteo OpenOffice.org
(they must have added or changed code to allow collaboration and integration so I call it the Ulteo version of OpenOffice.org. )
and MS Office Online Stack.
Don't forget to mention OOo extensions with stuff like Sun OOo Sharepoint Extension, others...
I should go now and bash a lot of biased opinions/ bust a lot of other myths and stuff.
This article seems to be a lot in the favor of MS Office while ignoring existing products.
Score: 0
|"No sign? I guess the 59,9 million downloads of OpenOffice.org 3.0 and the 15,8 million and counting downloads of OpenOffice.org 3.1 don't count as mass. "
That is far less than 1%, so not I wouldn't call this mass anything.
Score: 1
|"Microsoft has apparently moved on from making change for change's sake [cough, Office 2007, cough],"
Stopped reading there.
So, let me get this straight; Just because you don't use the additional features...they don't exist?
Cute. No really. Grossly uninformed comments such as that are just so darned *cute*.
Note to trolls: I have not offered any opinions as to the quality or usefulness of any product, feature or function.
Score: 3
|For users who do simple tasks with a word processor or a spreadsheet (90% of home users and at least 50% of business users), Openoffice.org has everything you need and can read and write to Microsoft Office file formats perfectly. For people who need the Outlook Calendar, 100% cross compatibility with more advanced features, more advanced graphs or the familiar Powerpoint templates, Microsoft Office is still irreplaceable. But, every person I know who has used both Office 2003 (or earlier) and Office 2007 dislikes Office 2007 and prefers the older versions. Adding a new interface is fine, but it was a big misstep for Microsoft not to offer a "classic mode" option that puts everything back where it belongs.
Windows 7 gives back about half of the performance that Vista took away from XP. Vista was 25% slower than XP, Windows 7 is only about 10% slower. This improvent compared to Vista is more than enough so that people will warmly embrace Windows 7. All Microsoft needs to do to make Office 2010 a huge success is give back what they took away. If Office 2010 includes a "classic mode" to make it like Office 2003/XP/2000, it will be a winner.
Score: -1
|"Windows 7 is only about 10% slower."
Citation? Source? ...or just opinion?
There are dozens of benchmarks out there now showing improvements in performance *over* Windows XP. (Not my opinion, just a statement regarding current benchmarks).
*shrug*
I like the 2007 interface. There are *definite* improvements to be made. Tear-away menus, customization, to name a few. ...and of course, my experience and that of my colleagues is in direct opposition to yours (though being entirely anecdotal, not worth much either way). Most of the people around here now using 2007 couldn't be hauled back to 2003 with chains and locomotives... ;)
(Ahhh...the beautiful imagery of employees being dragged behind trains. Sorry, it's been a "one of those days"...)
Score: 1
|I'm glad you asked for a citation, here it is:
http://www.betanews.com/...a-run-slower/1244848834
Score: 0
|Nice. One application....on a betanews test.
Now Google "Windows 7 benchmarks" and check out the one's from folks who actually do their testing *outside* of a Virtual machine. ;)
No big. I am sure there are systems out there that *will* run XP faster than Win7. Kinda like there are systems out there (supposedly) than can boot Ubuntu in less than 45 seconds... *evil grin*
Just messin. Thanks for the link, though. I had forgotten the Firefox bit. Never really understood that one.
Score: 0
|@manola: I'm guessing you don't know why MS went with the ribbon design. It seems that they discovered that about 90% of feature requests were already in Office. The redesign was meant to better expose that pre-existing functionality that was being continually requested. Maybe if people *actually* bothered to see if their software *already* supports a wanted feature *before* requesting it, maybe the ribbon would not have come about.
Score: 0
|Ooo Is slow and is crap. I have not tried 3, yet. I am basing this off of 1x and 2x. I was never impressed with OOO.
Score: 1
|One of the key questions here is whether Microsoft will open IE to the standards that every other browser has adopted, and enable the new Office to function as flawlessly in Safari and Chrome. My suspicion is that this isn't the case, purely because even IE8 seems to trend evermore away from open standards (Microsoft Update, anyone?). If this is the case, Microsoft's venture in the web is likely to be another Office Live fiasco.
Score: 0
|If Exchange Server 2007/OWA are any indication?
Nope. They're *still* making it pretty much IE only. In fact, (warning: opinion) they've made it worse.
From Exchange 2003, sorting was *much* better. Sure, we can now search relatively effectively, but the options for sorting in OWA 2007 (outside of IE), well....suck. :(
Here's hoping the recent upset in their normal routine (community licensing, ODF, etc) stretch to using Office Online outside of IE... (not hoping *too* hard though...)
Score: 0
|