Analyst: If You Want To Keep Your Job, Keep Using Microsoft Office
from the end-of-the-road dept
For a long time, Google insisted that it had no intention of competing directly against Microsoft in its core business areas, but as the company started to expand its online office suite, it became clear that the two companies would form a rivalry. That being said, few have argued that Google's office apps actually offer a substitute for MS Office (at least not yet), but rather that they work well in certain key areas. Nonetheless, one analyst is warning that deploying Google apps could be a potentially "career limiting" move for any enterprise architects. In other words, don't throw out your Office licenses just because you can save money going with Google. That might be good advice, except that it's basically just knocking down a straw man, as it's hard to imagine there are many people out there actually considering such a drastic course of action. What's funny is that the analyst then goes on to describe the 'limited' areas where Google's service might be useful; they include startups, small businesses, collaborative projects, and enterprise non-power users. It sure sounds like a large swath of the market could be well served by these tools by the analyst's own admission. Simply warning of dire consequences for anyone who puts too much confidence in Google doesn't really address the question.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: office, saas, software
Companies: google, microsoft
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Google Docs - MS Office
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I've been a Google fan boy from the start.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I've been a Google fan boy from the start.
and even though the school computers were all on M.S. office, I don't see how that would prevent anybody from mailing in (or copying to disk) any type of document which isn't a M$ Office document...sure, teachers might need to do/install something to be able to read the homework/project, but don't blame the school computers being all on MS office for homework/projects being refused...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE: Haywood
Let them compete on ease of use and true features without the document format lock in and see where things go... things might get innovative again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE: Haywood
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Haywood
They tried that,MS didn't want to embrace
This is a typical MS tactic. They'll open documents from products they know they can beat on the ground (wordperfect, for instance), but anything that might pose a real threat, like OO, they won't acknowledge. With a potentially more attractive option available, it does not behoove microsoft from a business standpoint to make it easier to migrate. That, and MSOffice isn't even very good at maintaining compatibility with different versions of itself, nevermind trying to do a common cross-product standard well.
In my opinion, OO is very nearly as capable as MSOffice in most areas. MSOffice offers better "fit and finish", but not enough to warrant the price difference (several hundred vs. free). The big killer, though, is Access. As much of a bear as Access is, it is MILES better than the wonky, unstable tool of a database in OO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Haywood
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...hypocrite...
Are you complaining because a corporate player is trying to develop an open format just like all the "little guys" you seem to be so exited about? At least openxml is openly documented and available, unlike those old .doc file formats. Microsoft is finally moving forwared a bit. It sounds like you're just bitter that MS is something you think only other companies should be allowed to do: create an open format.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...hypocrite...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...hypocrite...
It's not open when you wrap an xml tag around a flag that says, "do it like in word 4.2"
That is not an open standard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...hypocrite...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...hypocrite...
While that may be true, documented != open. last i had heard was that there were bits and pieces of the xml standard that are patented by MS, as well as things in the spec because excel can't do leap years correctly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open Office is not enough
Why do business people, especially technical be they engineers, accounts or business people, not switch to Linux?
First people engaged in business are not impressed with an operating system. They have a job to do and that is not programming computers. Simply said accounts do accounting, engineers build roads, bridges, buildings, electrical power systems et. Business people do communication and do contracts. Each requires special computer software which includes a world of software besides an office suit.
Engineers are noted for using CAD programs. The standard for CAD is AutoCAD file format not AutoCAD the program just as the standard for office documents is MS office format In both cases other formats work very well. One can do CAD and Office documents in different formats besides AutoCAD and MS Office, save then and use them latter, BUT!, one can not share them with other individuals which are using a different file format.
Open Office is a fine set of office tools which may replace MS Office in most cases and when it will not you are into some really weird stuff.
But that is not enough.
You are an engineer. You need CAD once, twice a week. You are not a designer working with CAD but you do need to make a few modifications and you do do this infrequently. Well one of the best CAD programs comes with most Linux distributions but it does not allow one to open and save in AutoCAD format so is completely useless to any engineer, which is all engineers, who need to share their work. One has a choice stick with Microsoft and buy AutoCAD light for $US 600.00 to $US 900.00 or buy a Linux/Unix CAD package for $US 6,000.00 or so. Or simply do with out.
You are an accountant. You have the same issue as the engineer but it is accounting packages.
What to do. Every body that I know sticks with Microsoft so that they can get some work done and not get fired for playing with an incomputable operating system all day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why do business people not switch to Linux?
For instance my company uses an integrated package that handles:
Order Entry
Accts Payable
Acct's Receivable
Payroll
Bill of Material
Invoicing
Job Costing
Invetry management
and other functions.
It requires Windows, and if you have MS Office, it does even more nice tricks.
Software companies build for Windows because (mostly) everyone has it. Although Open Office does a good job of translating from Word, etc. it doesn't do as good as Word itself. We are in business to do business, not to mess around with minority software products.
We paid for the Office license one time only, and do not update from Office 2000 to Office XP to Office 2007 because their is simply no reason to do it. Support? For Office? Who needs it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why do business people not switch to Linux
You don't know this(understandably, after reading your last paragraph) but: Open Office does a better job translating from Word, etc... than Word/office does (from one version to the next), even though it's their own (previous version of the) documents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why do business people not switch to L
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Why do business people not switch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: single-OS compatible software
It's the impossible dream for the foreseeable future.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
agreed
i have heard stories of over-zealous IT managers have done this, and it resulted in a huge user backlash. Users care about one thing: being able to do their work, and work includes exchanging information with users outside their org. If as IT mamager you make this more difficult, you are not doing your job, no matter how much you hate MSFT.
In my opinion, a hybrid approach is best at this point. Users who have never heard of a wiki, or don't realize that they can have their own site like Wikipedia, devoted to their organization, are almost blown away when I explain it to them. Wikis and collaboratively edited Google docs are a great way to go to manage some informationm, but you still need to have MS Office to fall back on for complicated layouts and spreadsheets.
I am interested to know what other experienced people here think about switching over to GMail for small (and large?) organizations. Obviously there are risks, but Exchange and its FOSS alternatives bring risks of there own. Is Gmail viable at the enterprise level? I know some have switched, but was it premature?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Exchange
Our ISP provides us with web mail, which we ignore. We use Outlook and download from our webmail boxes. Webmail is there for travelers and emergencies, and they also filter for spam.
So when I send email to the guy down the hall and it goes by way of Sri Lanka - who cares. I don't see a downside after 5 years this way, and I don't have to administer an Exchange Server.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Exchange
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PDF people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PDF people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: PDF people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PDF people
PDF documents are very easy to edit - sometimes even more so than Word. Of course, the average user probably doesn't know this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I was on vacation but the work just couldn't wait. I was collaborating with 4 other people back home and everything was truely seemless.
We are looking forward to the next gen of google apps and we sure as hell are not looking back at MS Office Pro Deluxe Vista edition or whatever it will be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
let it go
Micro$loth has run its course in every conceivable way. In the last 10 years it has only stolen ideas (Zune, Xbox, Vista's OS X features) or re-hashed (Vista, Office Suite, etc.). But I guess as long as it sells, there is no need to inovate.... Can't wait for Halo 3.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
UMM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The CutePDF writer is free and excellent. They have many other great products. No need to pay Adobe prices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Microsoft develops its own open standard and you bitch about it.
Microsoft doesn't make its software compatible with a little used (and FREE) office application which is essentially a direct competitor (did I mention it is free?) and you are surprised? Why on Earth would they want to do this? How could it possibly generate more sales of office? Why don't we just ask them to give office away?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Microsoft did/is not develop(ing) its own open standard and that's what everyone is bitching about...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
joking, joking!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
HTML and XML files are just text files. They seem to have created a pretty cool thing called the world wide web. It's what most people think the internet is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what we really need
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trust Me, Enterprises Are Thinking About It
At this point, I think the initial honeymoon is over. I talked to a large insurance company several months ago that had looked at Google Apps and had found some of the holes I mentioned--no real records management, the lack of roles making security assignment tedious, etc. They told me that when they brought these issues up with the sales rep, his reply was, "Don't worry. We'll get to that. You should buy now. After all, we're Google." (As if a well-recognized brand fixes all problems.)
So, in reply to your comment, "...it's hard to imagine there are many people out there actually considering such a drastic course of action," there are. However, at this point they're just considering, or have stopped considering.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hubris goeth before a fall
In 2007 it seems to be "Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft". Watch for the pattern to repeat.
No, it's not Google web apps, yet... but it will be something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yes these can both be done reasonably well.
and for sending inal documents to clients etc pdf works well.
the 'issue' is that if I email you an excel file with macros in it, that use vba... can you open it? use it? edit it? and send it back with revisions and it still work?
word isn't the best WP out there, keynote wipes the floor with powerpoint generally. but so far I've found nothing that even comes close to excel.
pity cus I hate the way its ever so slightly non standard, e.g. the annoying way it misuses the clipboard etc.
but until someone cracks a spreadsheet that is 100% compatable with excel files in terms of macros forget it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
conversations
[ link to this | view in chronology ]