Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Faces Fight Against Online Office Rival
bharatm writes "It's now been a decade since Microsoft bought Hotmail, the web-based e-mail service, for about $400 million. Now Sabeer Bhatia (the site's co-founder) is challenging the software giant's core $20 billion office desktop business. Yesterday Sabeer Bhatia released a free online rival to the bestselling Office suite of applications that will allow users to view, share and edit documents from any computer. 'Designed to help consumers avoid expensive upgrades and to foster collaboration on a secure internet platform, Live Documents matches features found in Office 2007, the most recent version. It will be given away to individuals with 100MB of free data storage space per user. Companies will pay for the system, either hosted remotely or on an internal server, at a discount to Microsoft's licensed technology.'"
And how is that different from Google Docs? TFA even mentions that it is getting a "Crowded office", with all these wannabe "online" office applications. This is nothing but a press release, a slashvertisement for a product that did not even proved its worth yet.
Nothing to see here, move along people.
"It will be given away to individuals with 100MB of free data storage space per user."
That's pretty cool.
"Companies will pay for the system, either hosted remotely or on an internal server, at a discount to Microsoft's licensed technology."
Okay, that's fucking stupid.
Office apps that REQUIRE a working network/internet connection to function are something that any sane IT department would stay FAR FAR away from. We just don't live in a world where everyone can be connected to the internet all of the time. And even when that day comes, most people would like to have their apps run locally, just in case.
The whole idea of "hosted desktop apps" is dubious (and I'm not even considering the inevitable "rental fees", which is a whole 'nuther scam). It might work for little "one-time use" stuff, but no one would ever rely on them for day-to-day work.
When will people realise that not everything that can be done online should be done online. The article is very light on details one of the big reasons I won't even try Google Apps is because all the files are located on Googles servers and I wouldn't have any control over them. The only detail the article does mention is that this "Live" office has Office 2003's look and feel. OpenOffice is free and has Office 2003's "look" and yet it hasn't replaced MS Office, google apps is free and hasn't replaced MS Office.
Next a small upstart company will be telling us how they have a image manipulation program you uses through the web which will replace photoshop.
Did we really progress from naked MySpace photos to such a disregard to our own privacy that we do not mind putting ALL of our stuff online. Besides server compromises and XSS exploits, the data can be easily disclosed in even a simple civil or divorce court case. At least with your own computer you can delete the files, use encryption or simply throw the hard drive away in the dumpster. Besides, what happens if the provider decides to suddenly discontinue the service or start charging $50/month?
I'm all for competition against MSO, but I fail to see the benefit of online office suites. And especially now that we have two. (and I'm sure MS is working on their version of MSOO (Microsoft Office Online))
The market for such online suites seem rather thin to me.
80 CC D8 AF AE D3 AB 54 B7 2E CE 67 C7
this is about as much of a competitor to microsoft as a cockroach is a competitor to me
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Web application developers/promoters seem to think we are living in a utopian society, with free Fiber-like speeds everywhere.
I have news for these people, internet connections go down, servers crash, on-line servers get hacked.
I like having an application on my laptop (portable), where I can access it anywhere. I don't need an internet connection to get at my data. USB keys, CD-ROMS, DVDs provide enough.
Software, as flaky as it is, can also be resold when I am done with it.
Try selling a subscription to some web service that you don't need / no longer want.
Software developers want a market that operates like the cellphone market, pay $20.00/mo, independant of usage of the service. Then add 'micropayments' for 'features'. A sure fire way of ensuring revenue, while nickel and diming consumers to death.
I will always buy standalone software. You can pry my copy of Office/Visual Studio from my cold dead hands, or when I sell it for say 50%. Take that away, and I can use OpenOffice, and good old GCC/G++.
Software wants to be like a utility company. Pay for the service, weather you use it or not. Without any of the regulation, security, or acccountability. Sorry, doesn't work in my book.
There's a brand of kitchen towels in Brazil I think called "Linux". Has the entity that protects the Linux trademark gone after them? No. Would they go after ReactOS if they decided to re-brand themselves and sell their wares under the "Linux" name? Probably.
As far as the courts are concerned, it's all about context. That's why "Lindows" got nailed. If they were selling Pokemon stickers Microsoft probably wouldn't have bothered, don't you think?
The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
Agreed.
These types of things are fine for college & high school kids that have very little confidential information. But when you become an adult, you need control over your information.
There is no way I going to write a letter involving a financial transaction on one of these things. Plus, I have been around long enough to see these things come and go, and my data along with it.
Also, what business is going to use this? If you run a law firm, medical office, or financial business you are legally required NOT to use this stuff.
If you run a business that has trade secrets (i.e. most of them) you would be stupid to use this.
I know MSFT wants to move Office to a web/subscription model and when they do these types of businesses will be out in the cold, or moving to something like OpenOffice (although many don't know of OpenOffice's existence, and OO really just isn't good at making complex documents. I wish it was, it isn't. OO is better than this web crap.)
Seriously, I have been waiting forever for Google Apps to come out in a Google branded server that a business puts behind their firewall.
I think Gmail is fantastic, but I can't put my businesses emails on there because of the confidentiality laws. If I could run the server in my office, problem solved. I know Google is about the data so it wont' happen. But the data is what I am not allowed to give them.
Also, you have the problem of working when not connected.
But I am always connected you say. Yeah, Right! With a web app, I can't work on a plane. I can't work in a non-free WiFi airport (unless I pay $20 for the 3 hours I am stuck there, delayed flights). I can't work at my parents house because they are out in a dial-up location (it isn't a radius from civilization thing but a how land features cause extra line lengths thing) and they are in a cell phone black hole.
This is a probelm as sometimes getting out of Internet range is the only way I keep people from bugging me and getting work done.
Lame.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
That's just a stupid idea. If the word is generic in its own language, and in the country in which it is hosted, it doesn't suddenly become "not generic" elsewhere. If stupid judges in stupid foreign countries want to bamboozle themselves and their countrymen into giving up their rights... well that's a different matter.
C//
Why is this story worthy of a post on Slashdot? So someone has come up with yet another MS Office competitor. Google already has Internet-accessed office apps. Others do as well. And there have been Office clones, free and otherwise, for over a decade. What makes this one so special? Was it that slow in the Slashdot bullpen today?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel