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.

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: google, microsoft

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Analyst: If You Want To Keep Your Job, Keep Using Microsoft Office”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Haywood says:

I've been a Google fan boy from the start.

But, another side of me says; if there is one place in all this that should be a monopoly, it would be office. Portability is the issue; We all need some format that can be read by virtually any computer in the world. I still remember when I was in the computer lab at school, disappointing students who had done their homework or project in another format and couldn’t turn it in because the school computers were all on Even MS works generated stuff couldn’t be used. If I had the program they used I could have opened it and at least copied and pasted it into Word.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: I've been a Google fan boy from the start.

a monopoly is never acceptable…as far as portability goes, there’s ODT, the Open Office standards for all MS Office type documents…

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…

Dosquatch says:

Re: 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.

Amos says:

Re: Re: ...hypocrite...

“Instead they tried to force their openxml down everyone else’s throats”

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.

Cynyr (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: ...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.”

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.

Anonymous Coward says:

Open Office is not enough

This is an example. I do not have time or knowledge to write a full report on what the issues are.

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.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Why do business people not switch to Linux?

Because there is software that requires Windows – aside from the “office” applications.

For instance my company uses an integrated package that handles:
Order Entry
Accts Payable
Acct’s Receivable
Bill of Material
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!

SailorRipley says:

Re: Re: Why do business people not switch to Linux

Open Office good job of translating from Word, etc. it doesn’t do as good as Word itself.

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.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Why do business people not switch to L

As I tried to point out in the parent comment the show stoper is not Open Office but is the other REQUIRED functions that have to be done that one can not do in Apple or Linux due to the unavability of user software like cad and accounting packages that will read and write to the quasi standard MS third party formats.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Why do business people not switch

Fortunately, more people are becoming aware of the need to develop for multiple formats. I think in the near future, we will begin seeing single-OS compatible software going the way of “to best view this website, use ie or else,” i.e. the way of the dinosaurs.

am says:


i don’t use any MS software anymore, but as a technology consultant, at this point i wouldn’t tell my clients, “Use OpenOffice” or “Just use Google Apps!”

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?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Exchange

It may not work for very large companies; but we don’t use 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.

andy says:

PDF people

A PDF can be read by anybody. More importantly, you can’t change it. Papers, letters, contracts, reciepts, invoices, communication shouldn’t be edited anyway. Even if both users use the same progame to edit it should be saved as a PDF anyway. Who ever creates the best looking document wins and everybody can see it.

Christopher Ford says:

The format that google apps uses is a truly portable format. I work for a small venture capital firm (55 people) in SF and we have been trying the google apps experiment since march. So far no real problems, but I do wish it had a better spreadsheet app. The portability thing really hit me in June when I was reviewing and re-editting some imortant documents… at an internet cafe in Prague.

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.

Wilhelm Klink says:

let it go

The “everyone is using it” excuse no longer holds any water. I think Adobe could revolutionize things if they made a version of Acrobat Lite. It would be able to edit PDFs like Acrobat does now but without all the publishing overhead. I think it could be the dominant product in less than one year.

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.

Banana Froth says:

C’mon guys, think like a business for once instead of some happy rainbow world full of free open source applications.

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?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Actually, coming from a unix world, where everything is text and all the tools work directly on text files, yes please, give me everything in txt format, thank you. A lot of times in the old days I used to run ‘strings’ on word documents to just extract the text from them so I could read them without peoples crappy formating.

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.

Tim says:

what we really need

is the ability to eat someone else’s work. We would digest their work output and it would immediately become clear to us what the authors intent, point, or results are. Conversely we would don our work Helmut and whatever we thought of would magically be created for others to consume. We could offer low fat versions as well.

Guy Creese says:

Trust Me, Enterprises Are Thinking About It

I wrote the report you mention, and I must say I was surprised at how many large enterprises were enticed by the thought of Google Apps replacing Microsoft Office, based on inquiries we got from Burton Group clients after Google’s announcement. The soundbite of “$50 per user” really hit home, and a lot of task forces were put together to look at 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.

Old IT guy says:

Hubris goeth before a fall

In 1977 it was “Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM”. IBM almost lost themselves to this dominance. They went WAY down and are still struggling to rebuild.

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.

claire rand (user link) says:

the problem isn’t pdf file, it isn’t editing documents either

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.

help me understand says:


Can someone please tell me how google apps is better than ms outlook for handling email conversations that can go up to 15-20 conversations. I’m not talking about a clean IT project. I work for a large organization that just switched to google mail from ms outlook. since i’m a user, not an IT person, i don’t like gmail at all. outlook was much better organized. there are search capabilities. you don’t miss a conversation loop. you can have 15 emails opened at one time to refer back as necessary. you could attach any type of file. you could sort your inbox much easier. you clearly knew who sent what where when. with conversations the multiple scrolling bars and stacked messages are so confusing. I can’t even begin to figure out what’s what. there are some that are just between me and one person and some that are me and 5 people. please someone help me understand. thanks!!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...