March 4, 2008
Google’s challenge to Microsoft Office
The battle between Microsoft and Google over the former’s lucrative and powerful Office suite of word processing, spreadsheet, presentation and other software is fascinating.
It is difficult to see how Google, which is putting a lot of money and effort into its Google Apps suite, can lose since it is starting from zero while its competitor is trying to defend a giant franchise. In fact, I would bet that Google will do very well.
I do not agree with Chris Capossela, head of Microsoft’s Office desktop applications and related server software businesses, when he describes Google’s efforts to the FT thus:
Looking at their software, it’s incredibly basic. It isn’t good enough for a 50-person company.
One reason I dispute that is because I work for a much bigger company and I use Google Docs, the online word processor, quite a lot. True, my use of it has not been approved by the IT department but that is the point. Since it is online, it does not have to be.
This is not to say that Microsoft Word is a bad product: it is not. But it has a lot of features that I simply do not use. Actually, my use of the software is, as Mr Capossela would describe it, incredibly basic. A few fonts, a spell check and a word count and my needs are fulfilled.
And Google Docs has a couple of big advantages for me over the version of Word that my employer provides.
First, all the data is stored online so I can get at my notes and documents wherever I am - at home, in the office, or even in a hotel. I do not have to sign on to my office network via VPN, or remember to save my work on the correct hard disk or flash drive.
Second, Google’s search technology means that I can use it as a database - although admittedly rather a crude one. If I need to find a past column or set of notes, I can retrieve it easily without having to dig around through folders held on different machines.
In the past, Microsoft has held off competition by making Word work well and by endlessly adding new features to it. Whenever anyone complained about this, Microsoft would reply that each of the features were used by some people and so it needed to bundle them all in.
Now Microsoft is fighting back against Google with online versions of its productivity software for small businesses.
Word and the other programs in the Office suite, clearly have advantages for users who want a lot of features. I don’t think I would use Google Docs to write a formal letter than I wanted to print out, or to print the correct address. But for everyday work, it does the job.
Google Apps also has another advantage: the individual programs are free for casual users and the premium product for small businesses is priced at $50 per user per year. At the least, it will exert strong price pressures on one of Microsoft’s biggest franchises.
I think your case is atypical, since you do not have to format your own documents, rather this is a function performed by your employer. However, for most small businesses and professionals (think of your solicitor), “all those features” are actually very important: they mostly have to do with the desktop-publishing end, something these users cannot do without; today’s standards for printed documents are that they look and feel as if they were typeset at a printing press.
So how many journalists are there? Many — but still not the majority of office application suite users.
Posted by: RCS | March 5th, 2008 at 6:00 pm | Report this commentWhat is this on-line version of Office for Small Businesses that you refer to? Surely, you don’t mean Office Live? I agree that the branding of this offering is terribly confusing, but if you think that Office Live is an on-line version of Office for Small Businesses (it’s not — it’s a smattering of offerings aimed at helping Small Businesses market their business), have you ever really looked at it, and can you really consider yourself a technology enthusiast?
Also, when you write a formal letter that you print out, what do you use? If you aren’t using Google Docs and presumably need to use Microsoft Office, wouldn’t you actually need to pay for MS Office anyways?
If you won’t use Google Docs to write a formal letter that you want to print out or print the correct address, what makes you think any small business would want to pay $50 to do so?
I think the biggest problem with Google Docs right now is that isn’t its dearth of functions and features (which are already pretty annoying, but as you point out might suffice for a small minority users), as much as it’s complete lack of ability to open up an existing MS Office doc and retain the look and formatting to any degree of tolerance. Unless the whole world decides to abandon MS Office and move to Google Apps (highly unlikely, especially given the current offering), we’re kind of SOL. That’s why other free versions of Office software, including Open Office, which have far better features versus Google Apps also struggle to make ground against the MS Office incumbent.
Posted by: PJC | March 5th, 2008 at 6:23 pm | Report this commentWhat is this on-line version of Office for Small Businesses that you refer to? Surely, you don’t mean Office Live? I agree that the branding of this offering is terribly confusing, but if you think that Office Live is an on-line version of Office for Small Businesses (it’s not — it’s a smattering of offerings aimed at helping Small Businesses market their business), have you ever really looked at it, and can you really consider yourself a technology enthusiast?
If you won’t use Google Docs to write a formal letter that you want to print out or print the correct address, what makes you think any small business would want to pay $50 to do so?
Also, when you write a formal letter that you print out, what do you use? If you aren’t using Google Docs and presumably need to use Microsoft Office, wouldn’t you actually need to pay for MS Office anyways?
I think the biggest problem with Google Docs right now is that isn’t its dearth of functions and features (which are already pretty annoying, but as you point out might suffice for a small minority users), as much as it’s complete lack of ability to open up an existing MS Office doc and retain the look and formatting to any degree of tolerance. Unless the whole world decides to abandon MS Office and move to Google Apps (highly unlikely, especially given the current offering), we’re kind of SOL. That’s why other free versions of Office software, including Open Office, which have far better features versus Google Apps also struggle to make ground against the MS Office incumbent.
Posted by: PJC | March 5th, 2008 at 6:24 pm | Report this commentIn my case, I used google docs to share and work in a group for a web start-up company that operated virtually for its first year. Google docs was good enough for organizing and collecting information relevant to the group. Nothing fancier was needed because they were internal documents, for members’ eyes only. If you have to publish your work, that would be another story, as the previous poster mentioned. I don’t think most documents at most companies are for external viewing though.
Posted by: J.Csaszar | March 5th, 2008 at 6:28 pm | Report this commentI am using OpenOffice and am quite satisfy with it. It is compatible with the Words, Excell and PowerPoint files, it is free, the experience is office-like and so far I haven’t ran into any problems.
Posted by: Christian G. | March 5th, 2008 at 7:08 pm | Report this commentPJC asks what I use to write a formal letter. I do indeed use Microsoft Word. So it is fair to say I - or the FT - pay for Word anyway. On the other hand, I am not sure how strong a strategy it is to rely on occasional use.
Posted by: John Gapper | March 5th, 2008 at 7:32 pm | Report this commentThere is a fine balance waiting to be discovered between the functionality and speed of desktop applications and the interoperability, ease-of-use and reliability of cloud computing. Google Docs has no desktop component, so obviously cannot strike that balance. Microsoft — if they perform wisely — might just find the golden fleece. We are, after all, living in the age of comeback kids (and gals).
Posted by: RCS | March 5th, 2008 at 8:03 pm | Report this commentI am one of the professionals RCS refers to and while I am attracted by the simplicity of some of Google’s Apps, I simply couldn’t imagine our firm operating without Office to produce credible, professional documents, presentations etc.
Microsoft have a huge opportunity available to them in terms of removing some of the flab from their latest generation products (the shift from Office 2003 to Office 2007 is not a pleasant experience), retaining the usability and familiar user interface (which is itself a strong enhancer of productivity) and then putting the whole thing online something like the way Google have done, probably for free for those who have desktop licences.
Could Yahoo! be the missing link in terms both of making this happen quickly and then getting traction in the online community?
Posted by: Peppe Santoro | March 5th, 2008 at 11:13 pm | Report this commentNot everyone has always online access - travelling frequently means that files need to be available locally. As for the ability to organise files for easy access - good that google has that functionality but a bit concerning if the FT don’t already have this functionality within their IT system!
Posted by: Steve | March 6th, 2008 at 1:40 am | Report this commentAs someone above has mentioned Microsoft Office 2007 is a mess for new users. They’ve completely ignored the previous metaphor of the suite, and developed something that requires a 5 minute google search to understand where tools are. Ridiculous! The changes are meaningless and frustrating to users, and as with all Microsoft products bloat becomes a negative in terms of user satisfaction.
The above comments of needing a word processing suite to produce documents fit for the printing press is not the experience of the vast majority of commercial users. I would challenge the vast majority of commercial users to correctly use the Reference features. Go round to many businesses and the majority of employees are using it just as a simple word processor. Google docs would suit many of these users, however these are the people that are most intransigent. Microsoft Office will become web based but will Google have got enough market share before Office is suitably on the net.
Posted by: Colin Tatnall | March 6th, 2008 at 9:36 am | Report this commentConsidering the long list of failed challengers to Microsoft Office — invariably with lower prices, and sometimes even free — I’m considerably more sceptical about the potential of Google Apps. Microsoft Groove already makes location-independent access to documents, as well as remote collaboration, relatively easy, so I can’t see much of an upside to using limited web-based apps, but a clear downside in terms of reduced functionality and performance, and probably also reduced security and privacy.
Apart from the technical limitations, Google’s advertising-driven model might be a cause for concern amongst some potential users. Add the apparent lack of ‘Postini’ security/recovery features in the free version, and unauthorised employee use of Google Apps starts looks like a potential security nightmare for IT departments.
Posted by: Thomas S. | March 6th, 2008 at 6:08 pm | Report this commentSize does matter – true in case of both the giants. It wouldn’t have been possible to any other firm other than Google to position their solutions this strategically against Microsoft. The Office 2007 for all of us has been a true evolution, which any software will have to go through. Yes, arguably Google Apps are simpler and easy-to-use than the Office keeping certain environments in mind but there is a lot to be done in that to compete with MS Office. Office during its early Windows days was absolutely appealing and admirable.
There are fortes of both the players which are apparent and have been demonstrated across the globe, and Office Apps is certainly an area which MS wouldn’t let go so easily to Google. And on a related note Google has its strength devoted in the Search Engine realm and anything they have done other than that (Google Earth etc.) are yet to come to comprehensive fruition. Microsoft also did invest hugely in launching their renewed search engine (live.com) which did not gain as much popularity as any one of us would have imagined. However the recent and most unexpected move from MS to open up some of its source code to the world clearly indicates that they have initiated efforts to eventually operate in a more open (web based) platform which should be giving them the needed edge.
I completely agree with John Gapper on his mentioning that we are living in the age of comeback kids, especially considering the pace at which things are transforming…the best is yet to come !!
Posted by: Manjunath DVS | March 11th, 2008 at 2:28 pm | Report this comment