Working Fast on Office 2.0

3. They need to know these services will stay up. Twitter being down for a few hours? It’s a pain in the behind for everyone, but totally unacceptable inside big companies. IT departments get fired if stuff like that happens.

Robert, Robert, Robert. Robert pleeeaase cut the drama. In big companies nobody gets fired for professional stupidity, you know that. You should know that it’s horrible management if you fire people who make mistakes.

Now inside “big companies” IT departments are often outsourced. And yeah, if the vendor screws up there’s gonna be discussion (probably about money), and who nows, the vendor is replaced by another vendor.

3. They need to know these services will stay up. Twitter being down for a few hours? It’s a pain in the behind for everyone, but totally unacceptable inside big companies. IT departments get fired if stuff like that happens.

Robert, Robert, Robert. Robert pleeeaase cut the drama. In big companies nobody gets fired for professional stupidity, you know that. You should know that it’s horrible management if you fire people who make mistakes.

Now inside “big companies” IT departments are often outsourced. And yeah, if the vendor screws up there’s gonna be discussion (probably about money), and who nows, the vendor is replaced by another vendor.

3. They need to know these services will stay up. Twitter being down for a few hours? It’s a pain in the behind for everyone, but totally unacceptable inside big companies. IT departments get fired if stuff like that happens.

Robert, Robert, Robert. Robert pleeeaase cut the drama. In big companies nobody gets fired for professional stupidity, you know that. You should know that it’s horrible management if you fire people who make mistakes.

Now inside “big companies” IT departments are often outsourced. And yeah, if the vendor screws up there’s gonna be discussion (probably about money), and who nows, the vendor is replaced by another vendor.

4. They need integration into their other systems. Chris showed me what happens when someone calls his desk phone. The phone call gets routed to his Windows Mobile smart phone and shows up on his desktop’s screen at same time. If he doesn’t answer it, the call goes back into voice mail, but the voice mail shows up as email in Outlook. That requires systems to talk to each other, something that doesn’t happen on, say, Gmail.

What an incredible replacement for voice mail! I am so impressed.

Forget the new iPhone and let’s all move to Windows Mobile! (Make sure to read up on the task manager, uh)

Robert, spot on… you hit the nail on the head. MS Office will remain dominant fo the foreseeable future simply because the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t.

SharePoint is having a play on this as well, but in general alternatives are becoming a reality. We are in limited release of Open Office, for instance, to see if we can get away from using MS Office licenses for the general public – those that don’t need heavy integration.

However, integration is becoming the name of the game! The layers of complexity build in the technology arena only to make it SIMPLER on us as end-users… that is the sole goal…

I wrote a little piece on this a few months back if anyone is interested in a read:

http://www.changeforge.com/2008/04/08/why-do-you-still-use-microsoft-office-vs-open-office-vs-google-docs/

@Toph – Start taking your zantac. you wish Microsoft would make your lunch lunch sandwich too?? Why would you wish that when there is a free market full with great alternatives to all things MS?

I suggest you take it slow and start with FireFox (it’s a browser, but it’s not from MS).

Gmail’s Postini archive engine is not a business class solution as we loose control of the actual data. MS Exchange puts us in control of the data and archiving – WIN!

Have you actually used the service? There is no loss of controlling the data and in a legal sense, you may not have a choice. Control of the data albeit retention using envelope journaling, not message journaling, has a different meaning when talking about the potential of compliance rules or company policies. Postini’s Archive and Discovery works in-line with Exchange and provides for full control of the data.

The benefit of using Postini’s solution is no limitations on storage, none. That benefit alone may help increase server performance according to some reading I have done on Exchange forums.

Every time a message is sent will be copied and then sent to the journaling account. Reducing that extra I/O may prove beneficial, though Postini still provides you journaling options.

Postini’s Discovery offers increased performance, less storage needs, increased I/O and less CPU time. Factor some of those into your ROI against MS Exchange and you may see a different result.

Gmail’s Postini archive engine is not a business class solution as we loose control of the actual data. MS Exchange puts us in control of the data and archiving – WIN!

Have you actually used the service? There is no loss of controlling the data and in a legal sense, you may not have a choice. Control of the data albeit retention using envelope journaling, not message journaling, has a different meaning when talking about the potential of compliance rules or company policies. Postini’s Archive and Discovery works in-line with Exchange and provides for full control of the data.

The benefit of using Postini’s solution is no limitations on storage, none. That benefit alone may help increase server performance according to some reading I have done on Exchange forums.

Every time a message is sent will be copied and then sent to the journaling account. Reducing that extra I/O may prove beneficial, though Postini still provides you journaling options.

Postini’s Discovery offers increased performance, less storage needs, increased I/O and less CPU time. Factor some of those into your ROI against MS Exchange and you may see a different result.

Gmail’s Postini archive engine is not a business class solution as we loose control of the actual data. MS Exchange puts us in control of the data and archiving – WIN!

Have you actually used the service? There is no loss of controlling the data and in a legal sense, you may not have a choice. Control of the data albeit retention using envelope journaling, not message journaling, has a different meaning when talking about the potential of compliance rules or company policies. Postini’s Archive and Discovery works in-line with Exchange and provides for full control of the data.

The benefit of using Postini’s solution is no limitations on storage, none. That benefit alone may help increase server performance according to some reading I have done on Exchange forums.

Every time a message is sent will be copied and then sent to the journaling account. Reducing that extra I/O may prove beneficial, though Postini still provides you journaling options.

Postini’s Discovery offers increased performance, less storage needs, increased I/O and less CPU time. Factor some of those into your ROI against MS Exchange and you may see a different result.

Gmail’s Postini archive engine is not a business class solution as we loose control of the actual data. MS Exchange puts us in control of the data and archiving – WIN!

Have you actually used the service? There is no loss of controlling the data and in a legal sense, you may not have a choice. Control of the data albeit retention using envelope journaling, not message journaling, has a different meaning when talking about the potential of compliance rules or company policies. Postini’s Archive and Discovery works in-line with Exchange and provides for full control of the data.

The benefit of using Postini’s solution is no limitations on storage, none. That benefit alone may help increase server performance according to some reading I have done on Exchange forums.

Every time a message is sent will be copied and then sent to the journaling account. Reducing that extra I/O may prove beneficial, though Postini still provides you journaling options.

Postini’s Discovery offers increased performance, less storage needs, increased I/O and less CPU time. Factor some of those into your ROI against MS Exchange and you may see a different result.

Gmail’s Postini archive engine is not a business class solution as we loose control of the actual data. MS Exchange puts us in control of the data and archiving – WIN!

Have you actually used the service? There is no loss of controlling the data and in a legal sense, you may not have a choice. Control of the data albeit retention using envelope journaling, not message journaling, has a different meaning when talking about the potential of compliance rules or company policies. Postini’s Archive and Discovery works in-line with Exchange and provides for full control of the data.

The benefit of using Postini’s solution is no limitations on storage, none. That benefit alone may help increase server performance according to some reading I have done on Exchange forums.

Every time a message is sent will be copied and then sent to the journaling account. Reducing that extra I/O may prove beneficial, though Postini still provides you journaling options.

Postini’s Discovery offers increased performance, less storage needs, increased I/O and less CPU time. Factor some of those into your ROI against MS Exchange and you may see a different result.

In some ways, I do wish the last sentence of #3 were true; sadly, where I work (a university — five figure number of students, four figure number of staff, many dozens of IT people) while it’s true that the IT department controls the IT budget and policies, they are very definitely not in control of the services they provide, nor held accountable for the failings thereof. They imposed Groupwise (quite possibly the most braindead e-mail system in existence), with the result that IMAP now fails on a daily basis, just months after blowing six figures on newer, faster FCAL disks to try to compensate for the software’s painful inefficiency.

The discovery requirements mentioned do apply to all communications in certain industries, like financial services, but for most businesses, that sort of comprehensive monitoring isn’t mandated, or indeed practical or even desirable. No, I can’t provide a record of everything posted to Twitter – or every e-mail I’ve received, or phone call in or out – nor could I be legally required to do so. So, Twitter isn’t suitable for a stockbroker – but just fine for the rest of us.

Yes, there are lots of business out there still running Office – often Office XP, or even Office 2000. No, they probably aren’t attractive targets for Google Apps, but they’re a hard sell for Office 2007 as well – quite possibly harder, since it’s much easier for someone to try using Google Docs for a job than it is to go and get Office 2007 licensed, approved and installed.

1 and 2 aren’t the whole picture: our central IT department doesn’t control individual desktops or software acquisitions, nor does everything have to go past everyone. I could deploy Twitterific department-wide tomorrow, if I had a reason to want to; sadly, binning Groupwise would involve more hoops to jump through. If the IMAP service worked properly, I could at least dump the client for something standard…

In some ways, I do wish the last sentence of #3 were true; sadly, where I work (a university — five figure number of students, four figure number of staff, many dozens of IT people) while it’s true that the IT department controls the IT budget and policies, they are very definitely not in control of the services they provide, nor held accountable for the failings thereof. They imposed Groupwise (quite possibly the most braindead e-mail system in existence), with the result that IMAP now fails on a daily basis, just months after blowing six figures on newer, faster FCAL disks to try to compensate for the software’s painful inefficiency.

The discovery requirements mentioned do apply to all communications in certain industries, like financial services, but for most businesses, that sort of comprehensive monitoring isn’t mandated, or indeed practical or even desirable. No, I can’t provide a record of everything posted to Twitter – or every e-mail I’ve received, or phone call in or out – nor could I be legally required to do so. So, Twitter isn’t suitable for a stockbroker – but just fine for the rest of us.

Yes, there are lots of business out there still running Office – often Office XP, or even Office 2000. No, they probably aren’t attractive targets for Google Apps, but they’re a hard sell for Office 2007 as well – quite possibly harder, since it’s much easier for someone to try using Google Docs for a job than it is to go and get Office 2007 licensed, approved and installed.

1 and 2 aren’t the whole picture: our central IT department doesn’t control individual desktops or software acquisitions, nor does everything have to go past everyone. I could deploy Twitterific department-wide tomorrow, if I had a reason to want to; sadly, binning Groupwise would involve more hoops to jump through. If the IMAP service worked properly, I could at least dump the client for something standard…

In some ways, I do wish the last sentence of #3 were true; sadly, where I work (a university — five figure number of students, four figure number of staff, many dozens of IT people) while it’s true that the IT department controls the IT budget and policies, they are very definitely not in control of the services they provide, nor held accountable for the failings thereof. They imposed Groupwise (quite possibly the most braindead e-mail system in existence), with the result that IMAP now fails on a daily basis, just months after blowing six figures on newer, faster FCAL disks to try to compensate for the software’s painful inefficiency.

The discovery requirements mentioned do apply to all communications in certain industries, like financial services, but for most businesses, that sort of comprehensive monitoring isn’t mandated, or indeed practical or even desirable. No, I can’t provide a record of everything posted to Twitter – or every e-mail I’ve received, or phone call in or out – nor could I be legally required to do so. So, Twitter isn’t suitable for a stockbroker – but just fine for the rest of us.

Yes, there are lots of business out there still running Office – often Office XP, or even Office 2000. No, they probably aren’t attractive targets for Google Apps, but they’re a hard sell for Office 2007 as well – quite possibly harder, since it’s much easier for someone to try using Google Docs for a job than it is to go and get Office 2007 licensed, approved and installed.

1 and 2 aren’t the whole picture: our central IT department doesn’t control individual desktops or software acquisitions, nor does everything have to go past everyone. I could deploy Twitterific department-wide tomorrow, if I had a reason to want to; sadly, binning Groupwise would involve more hoops to jump through. If the IMAP service worked properly, I could at least dump the client for something standard…

In some ways, I do wish the last sentence of #3 were true; sadly, where I work (a university — five figure number of students, four figure number of staff, many dozens of IT people) while it’s true that the IT department controls the IT budget and policies, they are very definitely not in control of the services they provide, nor held accountable for the failings thereof. They imposed Groupwise (quite possibly the most braindead e-mail system in existence), with the result that IMAP now fails on a daily basis, just months after blowing six figures on newer, faster FCAL disks to try to compensate for the software’s painful inefficiency.

The discovery requirements mentioned do apply to all communications in certain industries, like financial services, but for most businesses, that sort of comprehensive monitoring isn’t mandated, or indeed practical or even desirable. No, I can’t provide a record of everything posted to Twitter – or every e-mail I’ve received, or phone call in or out – nor could I be legally required to do so. So, Twitter isn’t suitable for a stockbroker – but just fine for the rest of us.

Yes, there are lots of business out there still running Office – often Office XP, or even Office 2000. No, they probably aren’t attractive targets for Google Apps, but they’re a hard sell for Office 2007 as well – quite possibly harder, since it’s much easier for someone to try using Google Docs for a job than it is to go and get Office 2007 licensed, approved and installed.

1 and 2 aren’t the whole picture: our central IT department doesn’t control individual desktops or software acquisitions, nor does everything have to go past everyone. I could deploy Twitterific department-wide tomorrow, if I had a reason to want to; sadly, binning Groupwise would involve more hoops to jump through. If the IMAP service worked properly, I could at least dump the client for something standard…

In some ways, I do wish the last sentence of #3 were true; sadly, where I work (a university — five figure number of students, four figure number of staff, many dozens of IT people) while it’s true that the IT department controls the IT budget and policies, they are very definitely not in control of the services they provide, nor held accountable for the failings thereof. They imposed Groupwise (quite possibly the most braindead e-mail system in existence), with the result that IMAP now fails on a daily basis, just months after blowing six figures on newer, faster FCAL disks to try to compensate for the software’s painful inefficiency.

The discovery requirements mentioned do apply to all communications in certain industries, like financial services, but for most businesses, that sort of comprehensive monitoring isn’t mandated, or indeed practical or even desirable. No, I can’t provide a record of everything posted to Twitter – or every e-mail I’ve received, or phone call in or out – nor could I be legally required to do so. So, Twitter isn’t suitable for a stockbroker – but just fine for the rest of us.

Yes, there are lots of business out there still running Office – often Office XP, or even Office 2000. No, they probably aren’t attractive targets for Google Apps, but they’re a hard sell for Office 2007 as well – quite possibly harder, since it’s much easier for someone to try using Google Docs for a job than it is to go and get Office 2007 licensed, approved and installed.

1 and 2 aren’t the whole picture: our central IT department doesn’t control individual desktops or software acquisitions, nor does everything have to go past everyone. I could deploy Twitterific department-wide tomorrow, if I had a reason to want to; sadly, binning Groupwise would involve more hoops to jump through. If the IMAP service worked properly, I could at least dump the client for something standard…

In some ways, I do wish the last sentence of #3 were true; sadly, where I work (a university — five figure number of students, four figure number of staff, many dozens of IT people) while it’s true that the IT department controls the IT budget and policies, they are very definitely not in control of the services they provide, nor held accountable for the failings thereof. They imposed Groupwise (quite possibly the most braindead e-mail system in existence), with the result that IMAP now fails on a daily basis, just months after blowing six figures on newer, faster FCAL disks to try to compensate for the software’s painful inefficiency.

The discovery requirements mentioned do apply to all communications in certain industries, like financial services, but for most businesses, that sort of comprehensive monitoring isn’t mandated, or indeed practical or even desirable. No, I can’t provide a record of everything posted to Twitter – or every e-mail I’ve received, or phone call in or out – nor could I be legally required to do so. So, Twitter isn’t suitable for a stockbroker – but just fine for the rest of us.

Yes, there are lots of business out there still running Office – often Office XP, or even Office 2000. No, they probably aren’t attractive targets for Google Apps, but they’re a hard sell for Office 2007 as well – quite possibly harder, since it’s much easier for someone to try using Google Docs for a job than it is to go and get Office 2007 licensed, approved and installed.

1 and 2 aren’t the whole picture: our central IT department doesn’t control individual desktops or software acquisitions, nor does everything have to go past everyone. I could deploy Twitterific department-wide tomorrow, if I had a reason to want to; sadly, binning Groupwise would involve more hoops to jump through. If the IMAP service worked properly, I could at least dump the client for something standard…

Like they say: “No s**t, Sherlock!”. You should have just written a post about the sun rising tomorrow. It would have been just as obvious.

The fact that you thought this post offered any new perspective or insight speaks volumes about how out of touch the Web 2.0 dweebs are out of touch with corporate American. And why 99% of these companies have Zero chance of turning a profit.

Scoble, for you next “investigative report” I challenge to find one company on the F500 that has standardized of plans to to standardize on any Web 2.0 productivity offering.

Like they say: “No s**t, Sherlock!”. You should have just written a post about the sun rising tomorrow. It would have been just as obvious.

The fact that you thought this post offered any new perspective or insight speaks volumes about how out of touch the Web 2.0 dweebs are out of touch with corporate American. And why 99% of these companies have Zero chance of turning a profit.

Scoble, for you next “investigative report” I challenge to find one company on the F500 that has standardized of plans to to standardize on any Web 2.0 productivity offering.

Like they say: “No s**t, Sherlock!”. You should have just written a post about the sun rising tomorrow. It would have been just as obvious.

The fact that you thought this post offered any new perspective or insight speaks volumes about how out of touch the Web 2.0 dweebs are out of touch with corporate American. And why 99% of these companies have Zero chance of turning a profit.

Scoble, for you next “investigative report” I challenge to find one company on the F500 that has standardized of plans to to standardize on any Web 2.0 productivity offering.

Like they say: “No s**t, Sherlock!”. You should have just written a post about the sun rising tomorrow. It would have been just as obvious.

The fact that you thought this post offered any new perspective or insight speaks volumes about how out of touch the Web 2.0 dweebs are out of touch with corporate American. And why 99% of these companies have Zero chance of turning a profit.

Scoble, for you next “investigative report” I challenge to find one company on the F500 that has standardized of plans to to standardize on any Web 2.0 productivity offering.

Like they say: “No s**t, Sherlock!”. You should have just written a post about the sun rising tomorrow. It would have been just as obvious.

The fact that you thought this post offered any new perspective or insight speaks volumes about how out of touch the Web 2.0 dweebs are out of touch with corporate American. And why 99% of these companies have Zero chance of turning a profit.

Scoble, for you next “investigative report” I challenge to find one company on the F500 that has standardized of plans to to standardize on any Web 2.0 productivity offering.

here’s the answer to Tom’s adoption question:
http://www.it-director.com/business/change/content.php?cid=9453

Which basically says none of this Web 2.0 crap even shows up on the radar–even for SMB’s.

here’s the answer to Tom’s adoption question:
http://www.it-director.com/business/change/content.php?cid=9453

Which basically says none of this Web 2.0 crap even shows up on the radar–even for SMB’s.

here’s the answer to Tom’s adoption question:
http://www.it-director.com/business/change/content.php?cid=9453

Which basically says none of this Web 2.0 crap even shows up on the radar–even for SMB’s.