Ahh, Google announces a spreadsheet service and the bloggers go nuts.
This is a good thing in my book.
Huh?
It's a good thing because of my philosophy. I want better software. Competition brings better software. It gets product managers to worry about customers. It causes discussions of features that were long-ago decided on.
You're watching two massively different ideas about how computers should be used battling it out right on the world's economic stage.
On one hand you have the old standard Office that says "load locally and use local resources."
On the other hand you have the new, fresh and clean, Google Office that says "load on the server and use a thin client, er browser."
I know which one I'm betting on. Why? Perspective. Even with my always-on-$80-a-month Verizon card getting to Network resources is still far slower than pulling them off of the hard drive. And, that'll remain true for a long time. Also, the Web browser simply doesn't have the API support to do really rich stuff.
Which predicts where Google and Microsoft will really battle it out: in the middleware.
Ahh, middleware 2.0 wars coming soon to a browser near you. Why? Cause as Google gets more people to try its spreadsheets more people will ask for more features. If they don't get those features the PR will turn back toward Microsoft's approach (since our Office has a lot more features than Google's offerings do). There will be pressure on at Google to add features but DHTML (er, Ajax) will simply run out of gas. So, you'll start seeing middleware coming down. (Runtimes like .NET, Flash, Java, and WPF, are what I'm thinking about — I'd bet that Google is working on a browser-runtime of its own that'll add a lot of local functionality to Web clients).
On the other hand, we're going to feel pressure to add online functionality to our Office suites. You're already seeing us respond to that pressure (Sharepoint added RSS, Blogging, and Wiki's in its next incarnations).
All this is great for customers because they'll have a lot more choices again. I agree with Don Dodge that right now there's a clear winner in this battle, but I'm not cocky enough to believe that Google won't figure this out long term. There are too many smart people over there for us to not take this threat seriously.
That said, I finally have switched to Windows Vista and Office 2007 on my main working machines and, wow, is Office 2007 getting underhyped. If I was a Microsoft product manager over on Office I'd send every blogger a free copy and say "please compare to Google Office." I'd love to see the blog hype if we did that.
Update: Dan Farber sees the two approaches as complimentary, not competitive. That's an interesting way to look at it too. Joe Wilcox is worried that Microsoft will get distracted by Google. Oh, I don't think we have to worry about that too much. I worry a lot more that both of our companies are missing the small things. Believe me, if the CTO of General Motors wants a feature in Excel, he or she will probably get it. Google can't distract us THAT much. But, what things are we missing? What are the opportunities that are bubbling up that we don't see?
Update 2: Vadivel Mohanakrishnan reminded me that there have been online spreadsheets for quite some time. Zohosheet has one, for instance. The thing is, I'm very unlikely to give even a big company my corporate data, but far far far less likely to give a small company that stuff. Why? What happens if they go out of business? That shows the market forces that'll bring most Web 2.0 apps into one of the big three companies.
I’m not convinced that Google will provide any competition to Microsoft with Writely and Spreadsheets, but I am convinced that Microsoft will waste thousands of man hours trying to counter something that will not impact the Office bottom line (any more than YAOV – Yet Another Office Version) will.
And I hope that, having been through Middleware 1.0 (servicemark? anyone?), the guys in charge will be too wise to go through it again – it is a pity that takeup of ClickOnce and JNLP (Java version) doesn’t seem to have been that great, a much better compromise. The last thing anyone needs is to have to go through the Applet,ActiveX,TCL plugin (remember that?), Flash pain again.
Lets see if WPF/E gets any more traction than something like laszlo (http://www.laszlosystems.com/) before we claim that MiddleWare 2.0 is just around the corner.
I’m not convinced that Google will provide any competition to Microsoft with Writely and Spreadsheets, but I am convinced that Microsoft will waste thousands of man hours trying to counter something that will not impact the Office bottom line (any more than YAOV – Yet Another Office Version) will.
And I hope that, having been through Middleware 1.0 (servicemark? anyone?), the guys in charge will be too wise to go through it again – it is a pity that takeup of ClickOnce and JNLP (Java version) doesn’t seem to have been that great, a much better compromise. The last thing anyone needs is to have to go through the Applet,ActiveX,TCL plugin (remember that?), Flash pain again.
Lets see if WPF/E gets any more traction than something like laszlo (http://www.laszlosystems.com/) before we claim that MiddleWare 2.0 is just around the corner.
Ah, Scoble, you’re betting against Windows Live? The massive new initiative headed by the only compelling executive remaining in your company simply so you can say that the web is not a good platform because a rival is better at it than you?
Ah, Scoble, you’re betting against Windows Live? The massive new initiative headed by the only compelling executive remaining in your company simply so you can say that the web is not a good platform because a rival is better at it than you?
Ross, Joe Wilcox is concerned about the same thing: http://www.microsoftmonitor.com/archives/015805.html
Goebbels: no. But Windows Live is definitely going to compete on middleware. The most interesting gadgets are going to be built with WPF and .NET to take advantage of what I just talked about.
Ross, Joe Wilcox is concerned about the same thing: http://www.microsoftmonitor.com/archives/015805.html
Goebbels: no. But Windows Live is definitely going to compete on middleware. The most interesting gadgets are going to be built with WPF and .NET to take advantage of what I just talked about.
“Goebbels: no”
Yes, you are. You are either saying the web is not a preferred platform to the desktop and/or Windows Live is years away from being compelling. And yet… your company is floundering on so many levels it was the last and most significant announcement your company made. Of course, your company screams about everything and Live has hardly delivered anything.
“Goebbels: no”
Yes, you are. You are either saying the web is not a preferred platform to the desktop and/or Windows Live is years away from being compelling. And yet… your company is floundering on so many levels it was the last and most significant announcement your company made. Of course, your company screams about everything and Live has hardly delivered anything.
As an OpenOffice.org user on my iBook I fail to see why I should care about Google Spreadsheet. I don’t think I would want to trust an external service with my information like that.
As an OpenOffice.org user on my iBook I fail to see why I should care about Google Spreadsheet. I don’t think I would want to trust an external service with my information like that.
Goebbels: fair enough. I haven’t been screaming about Live.com, so don’t know where you are seeing all this hype that you’re telling us exists.
Goebbels: fair enough. I haven’t been screaming about Live.com, so don’t know where you are seeing all this hype that you’re telling us exists.
Err… its sort of the 80/20 scenario here, except its probably closer to 97/3 in the context of spreadsheets – i.e.: 97% of people use 3% of the features of Excel. GSheet targets that demographic – the Little League managers who don’t want/need or can’t afford a full-on localized version.
IMHO Google’s battle is against perceptions – i.e.: the perception that a web tool is a stripped down, neutered version of desktop app. Which, of course, it is – but to the 97%, that won’t matter – but they need to be shown that this is the case.
Also, consider that GSheets offers less effort-of-conversion than say, OpenOffice – i.e.: I’m more likely to try GSheets online, where effort is restricted to opening a webpage, than download, install, start, and use Open Office.
With that in mind, I’d say the OpenOffice/Corel/SecondTeirProductivitySuite players are going to get dinged first. Give the hosted app meme time to spread, and MS will see the At-Home-User demographic eroded too.
Just my $0.02! Looking forward to what MS volleys back with…
Err… its sort of the 80/20 scenario here, except its probably closer to 97/3 in the context of spreadsheets – i.e.: 97% of people use 3% of the features of Excel. GSheet targets that demographic – the Little League managers who don’t want/need or can’t afford a full-on localized version.
IMHO Google’s battle is against perceptions – i.e.: the perception that a web tool is a stripped down, neutered version of desktop app. Which, of course, it is – but to the 97%, that won’t matter – but they need to be shown that this is the case.
Also, consider that GSheets offers less effort-of-conversion than say, OpenOffice – i.e.: I’m more likely to try GSheets online, where effort is restricted to opening a webpage, than download, install, start, and use Open Office.
With that in mind, I’d say the OpenOffice/Corel/SecondTeirProductivitySuite players are going to get dinged first. Give the hosted app meme time to spread, and MS will see the At-Home-User demographic eroded too.
Just my $0.02! Looking forward to what MS volleys back with…
you are so imparcial…..
this spreadsheet is the start of a new era…..of course it’s not going to beat office 2007 anytime soon…you guys have been at it for over a decades and it still s**ks…..
i’ve tried the ’07 and it’s a good start, nice gui and all but come on…..make it easier to collaborate,….and cheaper….
that’s just my two cents…
you are so imparcial…..
this spreadsheet is the start of a new era…..of course it’s not going to beat office 2007 anytime soon…you guys have been at it for over a decades and it still s**ks…..
i’ve tried the ’07 and it’s a good start, nice gui and all but come on…..make it easier to collaborate,….and cheaper….
that’s just my two cents…
Rod: that, of course is true! (Although with Office 2007 I think the percentage of features used will double).
The real problem when designing features is that everyone uses a different 3%.
When I talk to the product designers over in Office they know approximately how many users use each feature. In even the least-used-case that’s hundreds of thousands of people. This is why Office Suites that have fewer features have never gained marketshare.
I can’t help but wonder if the “long tail” is relevant here.
When I first heard the idea, years ago, that we might be doing all our work “on the web” and our computers would basically be terminals, I thought that was absurd. I certainly would want all my work right here on my own hard drive.
Then a few crashed. Again. And again.
Now, big business will probably continue to use their own software and keep everything local — as might anyone who works with confidential information.
But most of us are on the “tail” — we may do a lot of computing, but it’s actually less scary to trust it to Google’s servers than our own little desktops and haphazard backup practices. We are online all the time, but not so overwhelmed as you, so a bit slower is OK. And we want that quick connection with friends and family — documents, photos, get-together plans.
I think Google is winning the tail.
Rod: that, of course is true! (Although with Office 2007 I think the percentage of features used will double).
The real problem when designing features is that everyone uses a different 3%.
When I talk to the product designers over in Office they know approximately how many users use each feature. In even the least-used-case that’s hundreds of thousands of people. This is why Office Suites that have fewer features have typically lost marketshare.
Rod: that, of course is true! (Although with Office 2007 I think the percentage of features used will double).
The real problem when designing features is that everyone uses a different 3%.
When I talk to the product designers over in Office they know approximately how many users use each feature. In even the least-used-case that’s hundreds of thousands of people. This is why Office Suites that have fewer features have never gained marketshare.
I can’t help but wonder if the “long tail” is relevant here.
When I first heard the idea, years ago, that we might be doing all our work “on the web” and our computers would basically be terminals, I thought that was absurd. I certainly would want all my work right here on my own hard drive.
Then a few crashed. Again. And again.
Now, big business will probably continue to use their own software and keep everything local — as might anyone who works with confidential information.
But most of us are on the “tail” — we may do a lot of computing, but it’s actually less scary to trust it to Google’s servers than our own little desktops and haphazard backup practices. We are online all the time, but not so overwhelmed as you, so a bit slower is OK. And we want that quick connection with friends and family — documents, photos, get-together plans.
I think Google is winning the tail.
Rod: that, of course is true! (Although with Office 2007 I think the percentage of features used will double).
The real problem when designing features is that everyone uses a different 3%.
When I talk to the product designers over in Office they know approximately how many users use each feature. In even the least-used-case that’s hundreds of thousands of people. This is why Office Suites that have fewer features have typically lost marketshare.
SB: good point. But, then, the trick for us is to make it easy to backup files into the Internet cloud, or, even make that transparently happen. Keep in mind that most enterprise accounts already have Sharepoint servers where all Office files get stored anyway (and I store all my files in Outlook, which gets replicated automatically to a server as well).
Also, I've learned that the Internet sometimes goes away (like everytime I'm on a plane) so keeping files locally is vitally important to most businesspeople who can't rely on the Internet for their vital data.
SB: good point. But, then, the trick for us is to make it easy to backup files into the Internet cloud, or, even make that transparently happen. Keep in mind that most enterprise accounts already have Sharepoint servers where all Office files get stored anyway (and I store all my files in Outlook, which gets replicated automatically to a server as well).
Also, I've learned that the Internet sometimes goes away (like everytime I'm on a plane) so keeping files locally is vitally important to most businesspeople who can't rely on the Internet for their vital data.
I really don’t want all apps to become web-apps. If that happens, we’ll be cheating ourselves out of a lot of functionality, richness, usability, etc. Anyway, look for Microsoft to make a web-version of Works, loaded with ads. *bleh*
Office 2007 blows away all current office suites, and moreover, makes web-apps look like mere toys. lol
I really don’t want all apps to become web-apps. If that happens, we’ll be cheating ourselves out of a lot of functionality, richness, usability, etc. Anyway, look for Microsoft to make a web-version of Works, loaded with ads. *bleh*
Office 2007 blows away all current office suites, and moreover, makes web-apps look like mere toys. lol
“I haven’t been screaming about Live.com, so don’t know where you are seeing all this hype that you’re telling us exists.”
You’re so high off the smell of your own crap that you think that you are the only source of hype?
Sorry, Scoble, in this case I’m referring to major platform announcements by your company… and in the last 2 years Live (or the theoretical push to web-based services which I do not truly see occuring) would be the biggest. Anything else has fallen far short of the hype.
And, yes, I know you aren’t hyping it because you are at least smart enough to not hype something so underbaked… and overbaked (at the same time). Unfortunately, you are still foolish enough to criticize Google based on the flawed criteria that Microsoft applies to itself.
“I haven’t been screaming about Live.com, so don’t know where you are seeing all this hype that you’re telling us exists.”
You’re so high off the smell of your own crap that you think that you are the only source of hype?
Sorry, Scoble, in this case I’m referring to major platform announcements by your company… and in the last 2 years Live (or the theoretical push to web-based services which I do not truly see occuring) would be the biggest. Anything else has fallen far short of the hype.
And, yes, I know you aren’t hyping it because you are at least smart enough to not hype something so underbaked… and overbaked (at the same time). Unfortunately, you are still foolish enough to criticize Google based on the flawed criteria that Microsoft applies to itself.
“Keep in mind that most enterprise accounts already have Sharepoint servers where all Office files get stored anyway (and I store all my files in Outlook, which gets replicated automatically to a server as well).”
Strange, every enterprise I enter ythat has Sharepoint think it’s an overhyped piece of crap that is poorly implemented so no one uses it… and other in-house built intranets or traditional software solutions are used to far greater benefit than Sharepoint. If I was a Microsoft shill, I would never, ever use Sharepoint as an example of the right direction.
“Keep in mind that most enterprise accounts already have Sharepoint servers where all Office files get stored anyway (and I store all my files in Outlook, which gets replicated automatically to a server as well).”
Strange, every enterprise I enter ythat has Sharepoint think it’s an overhyped piece of crap that is poorly implemented so no one uses it… and other in-house built intranets or traditional software solutions are used to far greater benefit than Sharepoint. If I was a Microsoft shill, I would never, ever use Sharepoint as an example of the right direction.
“Joe Wilcox is worried that Microsoft will get distracted by Google. Oh, I don’t think we have to worry about that too much.”
You’re kidding, right? Your company is the most profoundly distracted company around! It’s easier to distract Microsoft than it is to distract a newborn with a piece of tinfoil. Well, I guess that’s why you don’t have to worry about it… it’s already true.
“Joe Wilcox is worried that Microsoft will get distracted by Google. Oh, I don’t think we have to worry about that too much.”
You’re kidding, right? Your company is the most profoundly distracted company around! It’s easier to distract Microsoft than it is to distract a newborn with a piece of tinfoil. Well, I guess that’s why you don’t have to worry about it… it’s already true.
Forget about features, Robert, and pay close attention to collaboration.
The ability for multiple people at multiple locations to work on the same document at the same time (without having to install and maintain custom software at all endpoints) will have a huge effect on productivity in the business world.
Right now, business people often spend days e-mailing documents back and forth, when they could solve a problem with 15 minutes of live collaboration.
Forget about features, Robert, and pay close attention to collaboration.
The ability for multiple people at multiple locations to work on the same document at the same time (without having to install and maintain custom software at all endpoints) will have a huge effect on productivity in the business world.
Right now, business people often spend days e-mailing documents back and forth, when they could solve a problem with 15 minutes of live collaboration.
All you can do it sit back and admire the brand equity Google has, and just how far it gets them. Open Office has been challenging Microsoft Office for years, and some would say it’s a more credible challenger than Google, yet we hardly hear anything about it these days.
All you can do it sit back and admire the brand equity Google has, and just how far it gets them. Open Office has been challenging Microsoft Office for years, and some would say it’s a more credible challenger than Google, yet we hardly hear anything about it these days.
I think the key difference here is ‘Collaboration’.
That key feature (One that microsoft failed to deliver for years whilst in its internet denial phase) is what makes what google is doing so different from a me to Excel copy. A very large number of spreadsheet users do not use it for finance and higher order functions. They use it to produce simple lists and cards etc.. Often these are shared amongst others ( think local league tables, memebership lists, org charts, phone lists etc..). Thishas historically been difficult with excel requiring emailing of files and then merging changes, beyond the scope of many. With the collaborative spreadsheet this just happens. Add the ability to chat and interact whilst doing it and you have the single biggest development the spreadsheet has received in decades. This does to the spreadsheet concept what a blog did for word processing. Thats the innovation here, not actually Google’s by the way, preceded by NumSum, WikiCalc,IRows.. etc (I feel sorry for those guys).
regards
Al
I think the key difference here is ‘Collaboration’.
That key feature (One that microsoft failed to deliver for years whilst in its internet denial phase) is what makes what google is doing so different from a me to Excel copy. A very large number of spreadsheet users do not use it for finance and higher order functions. They use it to produce simple lists and cards etc.. Often these are shared amongst others ( think local league tables, memebership lists, org charts, phone lists etc..). Thishas historically been difficult with excel requiring emailing of files and then merging changes, beyond the scope of many. With the collaborative spreadsheet this just happens. Add the ability to chat and interact whilst doing it and you have the single biggest development the spreadsheet has received in decades. This does to the spreadsheet concept what a blog did for word processing. Thats the innovation here, not actually Google’s by the way, preceded by NumSum, WikiCalc,IRows.. etc (I feel sorry for those guys).
regards
Al
+1 for Al.
As always, Microsoft overlooks deployment, and does not see that this product can scale to release vertical market add-ons (healthcare, finance, …) to users in a very short time. All of that comes without installing anything on the client, zero footprint.
Can you remind me the roll-out cycle of Excel? 4 years, something like that, right?
This product was not written from scratch in the last few months. It already has most of Excel’s core engine on the back-end.
Microsoft’s biggest mistake so far is deployment. Unsurprisingly however, that’s with the same mistake that Microsoft decided .NET was not worth installing on XP boxes, which is actually a big limitation to today’s .NET client deployments.
Megacorps are hard to steer…and Google is making it blatantly obvious, even for the blinds.
+1 for Al.
As always, Microsoft overlooks deployment, and does not see that this product can scale to release vertical market add-ons (healthcare, finance, …) to users in a very short time. All of that comes without installing anything on the client, zero footprint.
Can you remind me the roll-out cycle of Excel? 4 years, something like that, right?
This product was not written from scratch in the last few months. It already has most of Excel’s core engine on the back-end.
Microsoft’s biggest mistake so far is deployment. Unsurprisingly however, that’s with the same mistake that Microsoft decided .NET was not worth installing on XP boxes, which is actually a big limitation to today’s .NET client deployments.
Megacorps are hard to steer…and Google is making it blatantly obvious, even for the blinds.
You know, this smart client thing might just take off…
Seriously, the lines are getting pretty blurry on the UI side. Instead of only two options (browser-based or local forms), we’ve now got a bunch. Simple browser, AJAX, plug-ins, forms over the web, plus various combinations of those. And WPF/+-e fills in some more holes on the spectrum.
I think Google has a pretty good chance at making an impact – if they get on some bandwagon that goes beyond DHTML. Heck, if I were a strategist in Google, I’d be looking hard at what WPF/e could do for me, or even what kinds of apps might be better suited as full smart client (like Google Earth!).
But as Robert says, that competition leads to nice things for us all.
You know, this smart client thing might just take off…
Seriously, the lines are getting pretty blurry on the UI side. Instead of only two options (browser-based or local forms), we’ve now got a bunch. Simple browser, AJAX, plug-ins, forms over the web, plus various combinations of those. And WPF/+-e fills in some more holes on the spectrum.
I think Google has a pretty good chance at making an impact – if they get on some bandwagon that goes beyond DHTML. Heck, if I were a strategist in Google, I’d be looking hard at what WPF/e could do for me, or even what kinds of apps might be better suited as full smart client (like Google Earth!).
But as Robert says, that competition leads to nice things for us all.
I’ll never write a paper online with refresh and close/quit still active without a dialogue box to confirm it…I lost many posts due to that.
I’ll never write a paper online with refresh and close/quit still active without a dialogue box to confirm it…I lost many posts due to that.
Robert – in regards to #9 – agreed! However – plot the users of each individual feature in the product’s feature set as circles in a venn (sp?) diagram. Beyond core functionality, I’d hypothesize, based on purely anecdotal evidence, that the overlaps would be big, and clustered – that is to say, its not everyone uses a different 3%, but rather everone uses the same 3% core functionality, and a relatively limited number of groups use similar additional subsets of the whole functionality (the overlap clusters).
You should suggest to the product group that they cross index their usage stats against the SIC code that each is user fits into:
http://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/sic_manual.html
Then, determine the average number of features or feature-groups that a given SIC code travels across. This would yeild a feature-usage-concentration-by-industry metric.
My hypothesis would be that concentration would be high – i.e.: there’s a finite # of groups using feature groups for a relatively limited number of things.
The marketing implication is that a well-executed intelligent segmentation strategy and feature set design could do some damage.
Robert – in regards to #9 – agreed! However – plot the users of each individual feature in the product’s feature set as circles in a venn (sp?) diagram. Beyond core functionality, I’d hypothesize, based on purely anecdotal evidence, that the overlaps would be big, and clustered – that is to say, its not everyone uses a different 3%, but rather everone uses the same 3% core functionality, and a relatively limited number of groups use similar additional subsets of the whole functionality (the overlap clusters).
You should suggest to the product group that they cross index their usage stats against the SIC code that each is user fits into:
http://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/sic_manual.html
Then, determine the average number of features or feature-groups that a given SIC code travels across. This would yeild a feature-usage-concentration-by-industry metric.
My hypothesis would be that concentration would be high – i.e.: there’s a finite # of groups using feature groups for a relatively limited number of things.
The marketing implication is that a well-executed intelligent segmentation strategy and feature set design could do some damage.
Umm, of course, SIC comparison would miss home users – they’d have to be a code of their own. And I don’t doubt that the Excel team has a very intelligent segmentation strategy of their own, as well as an understanding of usage patterns – I don’t mean to come off as a jerk talking down to anyone.
I’m just big on segmentation!
Umm, of course, SIC comparison would miss home users – they’d have to be a code of their own. And I don’t doubt that the Excel team has a very intelligent segmentation strategy of their own, as well as an understanding of usage patterns – I don’t mean to come off as a jerk talking down to anyone.
I’m just big on segmentation!
@22: That’s why I’d go for a XUL or XAML application. Client side framework used to run applications from the server.
Something like that you get the best of both worlds: a single ‘app’ to run all of your client ‘apps’, but they all get served up from the internet (or, as I still think will be the intermediate answer, the intranet). That way, you have control over closing without saving and so on.
FYI, XUL is the Mozilla framework: both the Firefox browser and the Thunderbird mail client are built on it. Yes, they’re client apps, but in theory, they could just as well been server side.
@22: That’s why I’d go for a XUL or XAML application. Client side framework used to run applications from the server.
Something like that you get the best of both worlds: a single ‘app’ to run all of your client ‘apps’, but they all get served up from the internet (or, as I still think will be the intermediate answer, the intranet). That way, you have control over closing without saving and so on.
FYI, XUL is the Mozilla framework: both the Firefox browser and the Thunderbird mail client are built on it. Yes, they’re client apps, but in theory, they could just as well been server side.