Slashdot Mirror


Writely.com Beta - Google's Answer to Word

bahree writes "Google has launched their beta version of Writely.com. Writely is their word processor and answer to Microsoft Word. In addition to the usual editing features it includes many collaboration features, as well as the ability to save documents as PDFs and RSS feeds."

39 of 426 comments (clear)

  1. What?! by FunWithKnives · · Score: 4, Informative

    No Opera support? Oh well.. Maybe in the future..

    --
    "We may face a scorched and lifeless earth, but they're accountable to their shareholders first."
    1. Re:What?! by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No Safari support either, which may actually affect more users than the lack of Opera support, despite Firefox's popularity on Mac.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    2. Re:What?! by WoLpH · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wouldn't be the first, google doesn't support opera at all, not with gmail, not with gcalendar, not with spreadsheets, not with personalized search, not with....etc.
      (altough most of it works pretty well without the support)

    3. Re:What?! by jlarocco · · Score: 5, Informative

      Why the hell did someone mod the parent troll? It really doesn't support Opera. It redirects here. I know it goes against the usual unabashed fellating of Google, but pointing out a flaw in one of their products is not trolling.

    4. Re:What?! by takeya · · Score: 4, Informative

      gmail works perfectly in Opera

      I dont use the other apps you listed but gmail definitely works with no flaws.

    5. Re:What?! by Punboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      That should read "non-Gecko", not "non-Mozilla". Not all browsers that use the gecko rendering engine are mozilla products.

      --
      If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
    6. Re:What?! by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wish Google would code to the standard rather then standard to the browser :( They're strong enough that they could force all browsers (except possibly IE) to actually be standard compliant.

    7. Re:What?! by l3v1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but pointing out a flaw in one of their products is not trolling

      I don't think telling you that my product supports this and this and that, and telling you that it doesn't yet support these and those yet, is a flaw in my product. It might be lack of features on my part, it might be lack of features in your browsers you would like to use with my product, still, when I tell you in advance what it does and what it doesn't, then I really think you shouldn't label it as being flawed.

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    8. Re:What?! by fuzzix · · Score: 4, Informative
      I gave up on firefox due to the excessively long timeouts when loading pages. For whatever odd reason it occasionally takes all day to load a page, and when this happens other tabs refuse to load either. I've had browsers with 15 tabs all spinning doing nothing and then all the sudden they all load.

      This might be an IPv6 issue. It's common enough with ISP supplied routers which simply don't deal with IPv6 requests so those requests have to time out before an IPv4 one is submitted. To test this open about:config in firefox and change network.dns.disableIPv6 to true.

      If that helps it might be an idea to disable IPv6 system wide by adding this to /etc/modprobe.conf (modules.conf on a 2.4 kernel):

      alias net-pf-10 off

      Good luck :)
  2. One step closer... by ack154 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... to a complete office suite. I've been using the Google Spreadsheets for a little while from the link in my Gmail account. Signed up for Writely the other day when I saw it on Ars. Pretty neat for an online application. Not too much left for a nice office productivity suite, excpet maybe a database app and/or a presentation app.

    1. Re:One step closer... by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As a business, why would I use an office suite that requires me to (in effect) give a copy of all of my documents to another corporation, when I have a perfectly good alternative that only costs a few hundred bucks per seat? The privacy concerns for this thing are far too great to overcome the cost advantage for a business that cares about keepings its corporate secrets secret.

    2. Re:One step closer... by stony3k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One advantage I can see is that your documents will be available anywhere you can get access to the web, which can be a pretty compelling argument. I also suspect that Google will try to sell a complete Office server to corporates, which will let them keep their data secure on their private servers while still letting their employees access these documents from the web. In fact, I'd bet that's why MS is so scared of Google.

      --
      Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes. - Mahatma Gandhi
    3. Re:One step closer... by supabeast! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "...why would I use an office suite that requires me to (in effect) give a copy of all of my documents to another corporation, when I have a perfectly good alternative that only costs a few hundred bucks per seat?"

      Any business with a competent IT staff is already putting all its documents in the hands of another corporation on a regular basis in the form of off-site backups. This just automates the process :)

    4. Re:One step closer... by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The reason you'd use Google everything as a small business, isn't because you'd save $<small> on MS Office. It's because you'd save $<large> on servers & an IT Department.

      Would you rather set up exchange, some open source calendaring app, or goocal?

      Me too.

      So you're right, it's cost vs secrecy, but the cost savings is gigantic.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    5. Re:One step closer... by JFMulder · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, I believe that Microsoft's Share Point initiative is something similar to what Google might be about to unleash. The only difference would be that Microsoft's costs more. This might be an interesting thing to implement in Open Office or any other open source office application. As far as availability, my preference is to have my USB key in my pocket to bring stuff around. I wouldn't put anything important on Google's servers, because of privacy issues. For example, I'd never put my budget spreadsheet in Google's Spreadsheet even it was the best application ever. There's just some data that is more convenient to be private than to be accessible.

    6. Re:One step closer... by mshiltonj · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As a business, you might find it useful to buy a "Google Office Box" to install on your network. This preconfigured works-out-of-the-box hardware/software product will run your small office's email, calendaring, search, spreadsheets and documents. It also comes with with a great Service Level Agreeement backed by Certified Google Technicians.

      Need more horsepower? Add another box, change a couple configuration settings, and the load is distributed - it scales horizontally.

      Since its all server-side and browser based, it fits seamlessly into you current environment. Training shouldn't be a showstopper. Heck, many of your employees are probably already using a couple of the consumer versions these services already.

      It won't be long until it comes time to upgrade your offices desktop PCs. You won't need any Office licences any more. No more Exchange Server. In fact (as your Google account representives tells you) there's this Ubuntu Linux package that may even make all those Windows licences uncessary. They can refer you to a Canonical account representative.

    7. Re:One step closer... by andrewman327 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know if they are any closer to anything than they were a long time ago. Google referred to Writely as being in beta back in March. I have used it since before Google bought it and the overall experience has constantly improved. I fail to see how today heralds anything new at all. Many people have commented about it here.

      --
      Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    8. Re:One step closer... by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      Google has actually created something that is less useful than other free alternatives.

      Google bought something that has a feature no other word processor has -- real, real-time collaboration.

      I look forward to using it, for just that purpose, to see if it's worth anything at all.

    9. Re:One step closer... by Robotech_Master · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Writely's real-time collaboration, in my opinion, leaves something to be desired.

      I'm used to using MoonEdit, which, while only a text editor, is a fully collaborative one. You see the letters appear the instant they are typed, unlike with Writely which seems to update chunks of paragraph every thirty seconds or so.

      And MoonEdit puts each contributor's typing in a different color, so you can easily tell at a glance what's yours and what's theirs.

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    10. Re:One step closer... by JFMulder · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know about multiple users editing the same document at the same time. Maybe multiple reviewing might be ok tough. It seems to me that collaboration is better achieved when multiple smaller units are linked together than having multiple people edit at the same time the same structure. For example, Autodesk Toxik is a compositing software that offers an interesting approach to collaboration : multiple artists can work on different aspects of the shot (compositing, keying, roto/painting, etc) and an artist can link to another artist's work and choose which version of the work of progress he wants to link from. He can toggle between the different versions of the other artist's work on the fly when a new one is published or switch back to a previous one if he decides the new version is not usable yet.

      I don't see how editing text can be correctly implemented in a word processor, two people modifying the same document at the same moment can lead to one people overwriting some else's work. Unless, as I said, people work on two completely different aspect/part of the document. It seems clunky to me. I'm not too familiar with word processing applications that allow multiple people editing the same document at the same time tough, so maybe there's just something I am not seeing.

      Reviewing on the other hand normally involves multiple people making comments and then a single person integrating the changes. Simply add your review tags in the document (you might even see other people's comments pop-up in realtime like you said) and then one person merges the comments. That would actually work.

  3. Sweet by Spazntwich · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sure this will also feature Google's well known "infinite retention" plan, whereby anything you ever write is saved on their backup servers, sent into space as microwaves to be preserved should the earth be destroyed, and also dumped into several randomly selected alternate dimensions so even cataclysmic destruction of our reality can't get rid of your records.

    1. Re:Sweet by mochan_s · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously, since I heard about Google's infinite retention policy, I'm even afraid of using google search anymore. For the simpler stuff I use other search engines. Half the pages I go to have Google ads and by using gmail and google groups, they've got a lot of information on me.

      The last last thing I want to do is use Google to edit my documents.

      It hasn't happened as much yet but soon I expect to go somewhere and see Google ads with very interesting (to me) titles. Then, I'll click and spend time on it and make me feel like I need to buy this or that.

      Seriously, someone has to start an open-source project to write a super-duper search engine code so that websites can use it to search themselves. It's easier to use google to search through slashdot that to use the slashdot search feature (which sucks really bad by the way).

      We have open source firefox and thunderbirld, we need open source code for searching.

      I'm staying away from Google calendars and google what nots from now on due to privacy concerns.

    2. Re:Sweet by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anything you type down should be things that you don't mind any others seeing. This is something you might think only needs to kept in mind with gmail, but it is a good overall rule, as even regular email itself can be stored by the recipient indefinitely and be used at a later date.

      As Cardinal Richelieu said:
      "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."

    3. Re:Sweet by mochan_s · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you've fallen into the trap of anthromorphosizing Google.

      Google isn't a guy who lives down the street and has a specific character and you can depend on him to hold on to your secrets.

      The leaders of the google has a policy and all but in reality it has stockholders and is traded on the stock market. People can retire, be fired or replaced but Google is still there.

      Saying something like I trust Google doesn't make sense. If there is an oppertunity to sucessfully exploit for money then you can safely bet Google will do it eventually.

      I remember Microsoft in the early days. Everyone considered Bill Gates a genuis. A reporter even asked him if he thought he should have gone to Physics instead of starting Microsoft? People thought he was so brilliant and genuis. It didn't take long for Microsoft to exploit their powers and become evil since no-one could do anything about it.

  4. Links please! by Jugalator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's with the lack of a direct link? Oh right, blogvertising. Forgot.
    (check the blog's title for a laugh from the author's mental age by the way)

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  5. No privacy by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remember, anything on someone else's server is destined to become public knowledge. It may be inadvertent, it may be because of a court order, a government investigation, a rogue employee, or because someone hacks the server. In the future world of software as a service, where your personal data is stored on someone else's computer, the privacy of that data is only as good as the technical, legal, and political environment makes it. For the US, as recent months have proven, that means there is no privacy you can count on. So be sure you never write about your questionable deductions on your income tax, or your recent affair in the Bahamas, or how you managed to carry banned items on your last airplane trip, or anything else you wouldn't want public, when using this service.

    --
    The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  6. Hassles now... by bcrowell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...or hassles later?

    The reviewer says Writely might be useful because downloading and installing OOo is too much of a hassle. Hmm...what about the hassle of managing two sets of files: one on your computer's hard disk and one on the google grid? The confusion when you end up with two versions of the same file, one on your computer and one on google's grid? What about the hassle that comes when you want to edit your document, but you don't have internet access at the moment? What about the hassle when you find out it doesn't work in the browser you have installed on the machine you're using at the moment? What about the hassle when your document gets too big, and Writely's performance starts to be unacceptable?

    AJAX is fundamentally a bad idea. It's an attempt to use a web browser and http for something they were never designed to do, and they can't do without browser-specific hacks on the developer's side, and breaking lots of familiar conventions on the user's side. It's also a retreat into proprietary software, at a moment when a full-featured stack of open-source apps is pretty much ready for prime time.

    1. Re:Hassles now... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      AJAX is a good thing, as it allows for more dyanmic web-stuff. Dynamic is good. Web-stuff is good. Dynamic web-stuff is better. In my book at least. The only abuse of it at this point I've seen is that your browser freezes when you load a particularly large chunk of javascript. Some people (ahem Yahoo Mail Beta) should really slim up their AJAX apps.

  7. First impressions by planckscale · · Score: 5, Informative
    When creating a new document, a popup dialog asks for the file name. The default text is Verdana. They give you about 18 different fonts. The font dropdown menu does not provide a preview of the font.

    Inserting an image is easy - a dialog pops up asking to browse, uploading was very fast. Clicking on the image gives you handles and when dragging to resize, the image shades and is re-sized easily and centers again. Numbering works as expected, bullets are not aliased circles, but small "diamonds". Keyboard shortcuts like cut and paste, bold, italicize and underline perform as expected.

    "Right clicking" in empty pane brings up their menu with cut, copy, insert image, insert link and bookmark, select all etc and the ability to insert 196 special characters

    Save as html, rtf, open office, word, and pdf. Also has tags and create RSS. "Collaborate" looks interesting but did not have time to test it. I think this feature is Writely's biggest benefit. Also "Publish, blog, revisions, and HTML Preview menus".

    Overall I'm impressed, the only problem I had was creating a colored background.

    --
    Namaste
  8. I found a major bug!!! by nbahi15 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have discovered a major flaw in this version of the product. It offers Comic Sans as a font!!! Please Google, kill Comic Sans, kill.

  9. Oddly enough... by Ichigo+Kurosaki · · Score: 4, Funny

    Google is not in its dictionary.

  10. Writely.com vs. my 3 evening hack KBdocs.com by MarkWatson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And the winner is: Writely!
    I wrote about Writely a few days ago (and generally liked it). I wrote my own online word processor last year (KBdocs.com for my own use, then opened up free registration - got 1000+ uesers. My system was a 3 evening hack - generally OK, but not feature rich.
    Google Calendars has a huge advantage because of the GMail integration. Writely.com's advantage will likely be a good integration with blogspot, etc.

  11. Countdown to IE7 breakage by supabeast! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone want to start a pool on what CSS/javascript features get broken or removed in future releases of IE7 as Microsoft tries to kill Writely and Google Spreadsheets?

  12. Explained in FAQ by alphabetsoup · · Score: 5, Informative

    They explain it here: http://www.google.com/support/writely/bin/answer.p y?answer=38914&topic=8616

    The reason is poor design mode support in Safari.

  13. The Truth About Browser Support by Jahz · · Score: 5, Interesting
    One of my friends worked for Google up until a few weeks ago. We discussed this issue a few times as I would criticize the big G for not supporting sarafi/konquerer as fast as IE/FF. If you remember Google Maps initial beta, you should recall that it had pretty poor browser support. In, fact this has been a theme throughout many Google betas. The truth is that when Google says "beta" they really mean "proof of concept." I guess people would rather use Betas than POCs for the obvious reasons.


    You and I say "why can't this support safari,oper,konquerer?" The whole cross-platform concept is very very expensive. It requires developers, testers, a qa qualification process, time, etc. All that is waaay to much (even for a rich company) to invest in every project. Add into this mix the fact that most of Google Labs' ambitious projects... well... fade gracefully into the night... it's just not worth it.


    We're all familiar with the process by now. Google releases a new Beta. People use it, or they don't. After a few months, if enough interest remains, Google will start putting some muscle behind its beta. Other ideas don't get so popular and never escape the Google Labs page. (though they don't exactly die either... more like a deep sleep) There are many examples of underdeveloped proof of concept projects at http://labs.google.com/ like the really cool Google Ride Finder. The world just isnt ready for that yet.


    Also see Google Suggest, the oldest remaining beta (4 years!!). It's downright crappy webpage is a front for an underdeveloped topic detection algorithm. I wish they'd finish it or open the source :)

    --
    There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
  14. Is it just me? by JustNiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...or does anyone else also hate the idea of having private documents stored on a server rather than (only) on your own PC?

  15. Yeah, it's free, but big deal. by sdnoob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The way that most (home users especially) buy computers, they already come with a word processor of some sort bundled with all the other crap the OEM (HP, Dell, etc) sticks on the system. It's nearly impossible to buy a major manufacturer's system without all the preloaded junk, and often times you spend the same or more on the stripped down version. (Yes, you can 'roll your own' system, but *MOST* people don't do that, nor do they know how.) So, most home users have either Works or Word Perfect (Mac's have their own), which is more than adequate for virtually all their text document writing needs. Those that don't have something preloaded can install OpenOffice.org or even Abiword for a free word processor.

    Big business, with the typical big-business IT strategy has already chosen (most likely) Microsoft Office to standardize on. The few forward-thinking organizations are already using something like OpenOffice.org.

    Many business users of Microsoft Office have 'install at home' rights to their business' license of Office, so those folks can use Office at home as well as at work.

    With a 500k maximum document size, limited feature set, and all the privacy concerns that go along with using a Google-owned web application -- the only people that can really get some use out of Writely is people with blogs who can post directly one of the six compatible blogging sites (since blogs are typically published to the public, less privacy issues). And still, you're giving Google your login information for the blog (another privacy concern), so I'd think it's only a viable tool for Google's own Blogger.com users (since Google's already got your login information there).

    And, not to forget, a web-based app requires web access of a sufficient speed to use -- and not everybody is hooked up to a full-time high speed internet connection. "Little Tommy couldn't hand in his homework because the internet was down" could become the new "My dog ate my homework", and with reliability problems some broadband providers have, there might actually be some truth to the excuse.

    The speculation of a Google-box appliance that big business can install on their own LAN, without the privacy concerns of using a Google web-based application sounds like it *could* be a serious contender against Microsoft Office, but it needs to be a complete and integrated solution suite, and even then it will likely be a tough sell. Google's got a lot of work to do before they're ready for that.

    I think it's primarily a traffic generating gimmick for Google (until the above business server materializes). People will use it, but not necessarily need the few unique features it has, simply because "it's there" and they've already been hooked into some other Google gimmick or gadget (mail, calendar, talk, etc).

  16. The price of not having your software freedom. by jbn-o · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Although you mean price when you say "free", it is interesting to note what Google's online services deprive you of.

    I'm not free to run Writely on my own LAN so that my LAN users don't have to reveal the content of their documents to Google. For all I know, Google will leak a user's information and I'd rather not give them so much information to work with. They say they "take security very seriously" in their Writely tour but I can't prevent a disgruntled Google employee from distributing copies of information I've written with Writely except to not give them that information in the first place.

    I'm also not free to modify Writely to suit my needs. So if I want to run the service on a machine in my house and provide that service to myself over the Internet, I can't make sure that the program does what I want it to do.

    Most of the services Google offers are unimaginative and simply not attractive when one considers that they're indexing everything you do with them so that they can build saleable profile on you and possibly inadvertantly leak information to others. I'd rather run locally-hosted free software programs like OpenOffice.org.

  17. Price is the least of their differences.... by RareButSeriousSideEf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nah, the difference will be that Microsoft will bloat their offerings so much they won't fit through the office door. Google keeps `em down to the most utilized features -- those worth cramming into an Ajax app.

    Privacy issues are a legitimate concern no doubt, but let me tell you: I'm a full time developer on the MS stack - including SharePoint - and the last thing in the world I'd ever want to have to use on a regular basis is a SharePoint portal. I've seen plenty of abandoned SP implementations, mainly over complexity, learning curve and sluggishness of navigation. I've seen none fully utilized.

    If Google realizes how many concerns they'd ease by offering strong crypto, I think they'd win over that fraction of the market who, like you, are holding out over privacy conerns. For example, if they offered encrypted storage whereby they had only the public and not the private keys to the stored documents, I'd be fine with storing just about anything on their servers.