Slashdot Mirror
No Office Suite Google
Simon (S2) writes "Google co-founder Sergey Brin has quashed speculation that the giant ad broker is to introduce a web-based Office suite. "We don't have any plans," he told Web 2.0 conference organizer John Battelle (pictured below). However Brin left the door open a little. Documents would be easier to work with in the future, he promised, but he didn't think a fat client was the way to go. "I don't really think that the thing is to take a previous generation of technology and port them directly," he told Battelle. However distributed thin web applications allowed you to do "new and better things than the Office package and more.""
I don't see any picture below...
I hate it when story submitters just copy and paste from other news articles, not even giving them credit. It occasionally causes phrases that don't make sense, like this one.
It wouldn't need to have macro support. It could be a "portable" openoffice, where you just need to edit an document or spreadsheet then save it quickly, then download it when you come back home and work on it in openoffice.
I don't think Google could compete with a web-based office suite although I am sure there will be web-based office applications... (not as replacements though)
But this notion of them as the new Microsoft is just delusional. Journalists have jumped on it because it's a fun story, investors have to explain the ludicrous stock price and Slashbots have because a web-based, subscription-based, proprietary office suite with who-knows-what file formats seems like a fantastic idea if it will involve sticking it to Microsoft.
Look. This is a company with a great indexing and ranking engine, a great backend and a great sense of design and offering value to customers. That's, uh, great, it really is. Google should be proud. But to say that they can just bang out a Javascript-based office suite because you guys think it would be fun is simply nuts. It's not like they have magic powers over there, no matter what the cafeteria serves.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Revenue?
You could always use Writely :)
Steve Jobs said flash-based players were CRAP right until he unveiled Apple's flash-iPod. So Sergey can keep on shouting: "we ain't doing it!" all the way to hell, but if someone can develop a Web-based solution for working with documents, that is Google. And I do believe that there must be better ways of creating stuff than with de MS Office paradigm.
So I say, not seeing is believing.
Disclosure: I'm stupid
If I were them, the plan's wouldn't be to release ANOTHER competing office suite, but to work within what's already out there. Once OpenDocument takes off, you'll be able to create tiny tools that work with the standard file format... something like a huge suite won't have to exist anymore... Look what Apple's been doing with Pages... It's a whole new way of using documents.. that makes it much easier for those who just want a pretty sheet of paper. When opendocument takes off, you'll be able to use all that wonderful Googlieness without a 100 meg program open to just type a grocery list.
When did Google announce anything before they had a beta you could play with?
So, until Google & Sun work out what they want to do, and Google has played with it, there won't be an announcement... Announcing vaporware as the next savior of the universe is an MS kind of thing to do.
I have faith in the team of Sun and Google to work out how to make the most of 'being against MS' and then execute the plan...
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
If Google is going to take on MS, it will be with something much smarter and more subtle than a direct head-on frontal assault. So no matter how cool we think that would be, expect something else. Google has been pretty good at "thinking different" so far, and I don't expect that to change.
Think Deeply.
I'm pretty sure most companies have gotten over the urge to put everything on the web, but for reporters, a web app has to deal with certain limitations:
1. The network.
2. Flaky web standards.
3. Living along side other plugins and browser extensions. (That means Other People's Threads in your process space.)
4. No standard API for printing, the raison d'etre for an office suite.
5. Browsers, by design, have virtually no integration with the rest of the OS.
You would be right, except for the fact that people are already doing it.
If you don't believe it can be done, check out the actual applications. What many people don't seem to realize when they scoff at the idea of an AJAX based office quite is that Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari and Konqueror, all have "design mode" APIs that allow a user and JavaScript to manipulate the web page directly. Combine that with some excellent import/export filters for HTMl to popular office formats, and you have a decent office suite framework already at your grasp.
If you really don't think it can be done, look at those sample apps, and consider that they are done with basically no budget. Now throw the mihgt of Google, it's money, and it's developers at the problem. It is not beyond feasability that they could construct such a suite in a matter of months, especially when you consider that 80% of the functions in MS Office are only used by 20% of the people
Also consider how well this would integrate with their existing core competancies (indexing and searching). You could store all your documents online ina shareable Google store, and they woudl already all be indexed and searchable. You could use your Google addrfesss book to select other people who would be allwed to access and search the documents. And of course you would use Google Talk to collaberate on them.
Some immediate things that come into mind...
Yahoo! has a notepad service and I use it ALL the time. I used to email myself things frequently just to keep track of them, now I just create folders and notes in yahoo's notepad. I highly recommend it.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
Most recently I've been using Gmail for all of my text editing. With its machine independence, autosaving, and the best spell checker on earth, why would I bother with a thick client?
I think this is the way to go. I agree with Sergey, Google is in a position to shatter our perceptions of how office work has to be done. We don't need Word and Outlook and Excel. We can do everything with thin clients, XML, and huge back-end databases.
" With all the press they received about it... they should."
They'd have gotten this much press if they decided to take a vacation for a week. Doesn't mean its a good idea.
Unfortunately, you are thinking like a coder and not a businessman.
If efficiency was the gold standard by which an application was judged, then we'd all be writing assembler all the time. If code readability was the gold standard, then we would all be writing every application in CobolBasic.
All that matters, in reality, is a) Does this application look good, b) Does it do it's job well, and most importantly, c) Will people use it?
The consumer does not give a flying f*** if the codebase of an application is reuseable, or if it is cobbeled together with toothpicks and jello, as long as it works and makes their life easier. A web-based office suite would fit that role nicely. It would *just work*, it would do the job it was designed to do. It may not have every bell and whistle, but guess what? The vast majority of people don't care about that.
Not everyoule would use such an application, but Google would not need everyone to use it to be profitable. Hell, it would be so cheap to create and maintain, they could likely be profitable with a very small number of users in proportion to the number it takes Microsoft to turn a profit on MS Office.
No, they have the potential to destroy him and what he stands for. He could become the statue in the desert who used to have a huge empire but then lost it all. As long as he's alive he wants to be on top, otherwise he goes through the experience of losing it. No-one likes to see everything they built crumble away.
I am trolling
I use at least five computers on three different networks. Using Google for light text editing is relatively hassle free and featureful. But the key here is availability. As long as I am connected, my text is there. I also agree with your coments on the spell checker. I write in english and spanish and the spell cheker recognizes each language automatically. I don't think it has been lost on Google that many are doing what I'm doing.
But still, I think Mr. Brin is telling it straight. There's too much effort to be done in order to provide a network (or AJAX) equivalent to an office suite. Plus I don't think Google is too keen on reinventing that particular wheel. And it wouldn't (now, at least) fit along with Google's revenue making AdSense.
I think what Google will provide is key services that are available in most office suites today (and some that aren't, of course). Something like an Intelligent Formatter; where you just "send" the text you created via GMail to a service. Of course while you wait for the intelligent formatter Google serves you relevant ads on based on the words in the document you made. Or perhaps there will be a service where your text is converted into other formats like OpenDocument or PDF and even DOC...
I wish I could filter out the annoying Pickens articles...
Why would I want to use Google as a calculator when almost every OS already has one? I don't know but I sure use it a lot.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
Whoa there straw man.
I can pretty much gaurantee >5.32 hours of access to Office over three years from problems with Office.
The points here is that Office isn't worth $399 and in three years you'd have to buy at least one Office related upgrade and one OS related upgrade just to keep using it. Now you're in the $700 range. If I can get a reasonable office suite online for $15 a year AND it gives me remote access to my files (add MS File Server) and it allows other's to collaborate (add MS collaboration software)... well I'd rather use the web office suit. Thanks.
Sun was right when they said the network is the computer... and soon the network will be everywhere. You're plane flight example makes my point rather than breaks it. Don't you think you can store the files locally too? Don't you think that AJAX works even if you unplug the network?