Google Scoops Microsoft w/ Mesh Applications

Julie188 writes "Google's offline access for Google Apps is a kick in the shin at Ray Ozzie. Google took a page right out of the Ozzie mesh playbook when it announced the offline access (let's call it Google Docs Unplugged). Google delivered desktop apps from the cloud first and then added unplugged functionality. Microsoft wants to do the same, but in reverse, and faces an infinitely bigger challenge: rebuild Microsoft apps so they can become cloud enabled while pulling its giant channel (and embedded software) along in the process. Good luck with that, Microsoft. But then again, just because Google is making faster progress doesn't mean much. There's no guarantee users will like the unplugged versions of cloud apps."

Comments

SharePoint

[Anonymous Coward]

It's technology is called SharePoint. All Office apps are integrated with it and you can work offline, online, collaborate, etc. Oh yea, and it worked longed before Google docs did. This submitter is a typical anti-MS hack and doesn't know what they are talking about. GG Slashdot.

Re:SharePoint

[Per Abrahamsen]

It's technology is called SharePoint. It is actually much closer to Microsoft Office Live, as it doesn't require you to run a server (Microsoft does it for you) or pay a fee (apart from what you already paid for Microsoft Office).

SharePoint seems to be traditional client-server technology, and not related to any recent buzzwords like "cloud computing". For companies with a strong IT department, SharePoint it probably superior. For the rest of us, is is Google Docs or Office Live (or email, sadly).

Re:SharePoint

[value_added]

It's technology is called SharePoint.

No, Sharepoint is marketing brand name, notable for being refreshingly brief.

The technologies, on the other hand, are actually ASP.NET applications, which are served using IIS and use a SQL Server database as data storage backend.

Stuff is integrated with it? I'm shocked. Shocked, I'll tell you.

Re:SharePoint

[Enderandrew]

As someone else pointed out, SharePoint is more akin to storing docs online, sharing them with people, communicating with them, wiki functionality, etc.

And as someone who just implemented a SharePoint system, SharePoint is very expensive and requires some massive hardware. Google Docs is free and requires zero hardware purchase.

Re:SharePoint

[Thinman]

Not really, SharePoint is just a Web Framework with support for office documents, but you are require to have a copy of office in your machine to work with, OTOH google applications run on the server and display on your browser.....

Regards.

Re:SharePoint

[The Spoonman]

Only if implemented by incompetent boobs. Considering that describes a good 90-95% of IT folks, your comments are not surprising. When we migrated our Intranet to Sharepoint last year, pretty much unilaterally our 14,000 users said "FINALLY! An intranet that does what we need!" It's been fantastic, and they just love being able to manipulate the site to provide them just the information and applications they need. We've now begun a project to provide it to our clients, and their reaction has been the same.

Now, to the topic at hand: no, I have no interest in offline Google Apps. Google Apps is a barely usable hack that provides the barest of minimums of features for users. It's good for my grandmother, but even my mother finds it too limiting. Add to that using Firefox/Gears uses 5-10X the resources on machine and it just doesn't cute it. Microsoft's solution is exactly the path I'd go. It gives me the flexibility to use real applications AND still have access to my docs everywhere. But, I'm not a luddite, so...

Re:SharePoint

[lbgator]

While I agree with your post in general, I am rankled by everyone calling Docs a "barely usable hack". Every user has differing needs, and your needs simply aren't met by Docs. That's fine: don't use it.

Google Docs does provide a simple free office suite with good collaboration, sharing, and version control. There are a lot of things it cannot do well or at all (graphs, embedded objects, work quickly, etc) but that is not to say it is worthless. Some people cannot be sure that they will have access to MS Office on every machine they encounter daily, some people may want to seamlessly collaborate with people who don't own office, some people may just choose not to use MS products but still want an easy online Office Suite. There are many scenarios that I can think of where something can go wrong with the MS solution, this is where Google shines. There are many features that Office has that GDocs doesn't. Every user has to choose what it is they are really after. No reason to get upset or fling insults.

Re:SharePoint

[0racle]

First, if you're not an incompetent boob, why couldn't you get anything before SharePoint to do what users need? Second, SharePoint sucks when you have a mixed client network, which is typical of Microsoft products.

Re:SharePoint

[notaprguy]

You're half right. SharePoint is designed more for business use whereas Google apps are designed more for geek's trying to organize a geek party. Office Live offers much of the same of the same functionality as SharePoint in a more simplified version. In terms of making apps available offline...I have this new fangled thing called Office that works reallyh well regardless of whether I'm connected or not. I can even set it up so that when I re-connect that the file is synchronized up to a Web site. Amazing stuff!

Re:SharePoint

[TheNarrator]

Yeah I'm a Linux user and I'd much rather use OpenOffice than Google Apps. Even AbiWord and Gnumeric are better. Google has to realize that browser based javascript is just not going to do it for full-blown office apps. Microsoft specifically broke the environment it so it wouldn't be able to do that. It's freakin' single threaded!

If they were smart they would switch to a SWT (e.g Eclipse IDE) rich client platform installed via java web start that contained strong web services integration with google for sharing, search and collaboration. Java 1.6 is damned fast now and and NetBeans and the Eclipse IDE have shown that Java can really shine on the desktop. Maybe with the newly released Java Micro-Kernel (Update N/Consumer JRE) they will move toward this direction. Update N is a few megabytes download and downloads the rest of the Java libs as needed.

devil is in the detail

[nguy]

People have been using mixed on-line/off-line computing for a long time; neither Microsoft nor Google invented this or were the first to figure out that it was useful.

What matters is how exactly it's done. I find Google's offerings a lot more persuasive than Microsoft's. Microsoft's collaborative features are cumbersome and hard to use, and Microsoft's office suite is expensive and heavy-weight. Google Docs is easy to get started with and works for most people; mainly what it needs is better embedded object support (including math) and bug fixing.

Re:devil is in the detail

[Blakey Rat]

I don't really get the argument here. What's the difference between Google Docs' new functionality and Office Live? Other than that Microsoft is working from the desktop and moving to the web, and Google is working from the web and moving to the desktop. Oh, also: Office Live exists right now (albeit in beta), and Google only has a press release.

The article doesn't give a compelling reason for Microsoft being "scooped" in this case-- in fact, I think its author simply just don't know Office Live exists. Or am I missing something?

Re:devil is in the detail

[nguy]

What's the difference between Google Docs' new functionality and Office Live?

Several major ones: (1) Google Docs sharing is actually live; you can see other people's edits being made in real time, (2) all you need with Google Docs is a web browser--nothing to install, (3) Google Docs are data sources and sinks for mashups and other applications (including web forms submissions), (4) user management and sharing is much, much simpler with Google Docs--you can share and work with anybody, (5) Google Docs can integrate with both MS Office and OpenOffice, (6) Google Docs has mobile access.

Oh, also: Office Live exists right now (albeit in beta), and Google only has a press release.

Google Docs has had the limited sharing functionality found in Office Live since before Office Live even existed. The new Gears-based off-line mode is simpler and better and something that Microsoft simply doesn't have at all.

Re:devil is in the detail

[uptownguy]

We're actually comparing Google Docs and Office Live for a client rollout and I put both them both head-to-head yesterday. Clearly, some of your information is outdated.

(1) Google Docs sharing is actually live; you can see other people's edits being made in real time,
 
Same with Office Live. Different way of "seeing" and I prefer Google's but both work. And with a OneNote Notebook shared? Now THAT is nice and I prefer that to both.

(2) all you need with Google Docs is a web browser--nothing to install,

As long as you are editing/viewing someone else's Office Live Document, the same is true.
 
  (3) Google Docs are data sources and sinks for mashups and other applications (including web forms submissions)
 
I honestly have no idea on this one so I'll take your word on it. More to the point, I'd be curious to know about how easy those mashups are to create in Google Docs. I guess I've got more research to do! ;)
 
  (4) user management and sharing is much, much simpler with Google Docs--you can share and work with anybody,

Not true. This was the biggest surprise for me. The ease of use for inviting others is the same. In Office Live, it's as easy as entering someone's email address. Seriously. I expected it to be much more complicated from everything I read. It is not.
 
  (5) Google Docs can integrate with both MS Office and OpenOffice,
 
Or the flip side of this is to say that Google Docs will not open MS Word documents like people expect them to. And Spreadsheets will not open and look like you would think they should look in Excel. With Office Live, the curve is much less steep. Yes, proprietary formats are evil and the cause of this in the first place. Etc. etc. etc. But if you are a business with a few hundred spreadsheets that might or might not open as expected in Google Docs, Office Live becomes hard to ignore.
 
  (6) Google Docs has mobile access.

Nope. Or rather, yes, I guess you can *view* your Google Docs in a mobile view. But there is no way to edit them, at least from the phone I was testing it on. The same is true for Office Live. Both have great mobile viewers ... and make editing online next to impossible.

There's a lot of testing we have yet to do. And we aren't even close to deciding between the two. (Free as in beer vs. works with 100% of your current documents.) But -- as someone who spent most of yesterday comparing the two head-to-head, I really wanted to clear up that 4-5 out of your 6 points were no longer true.

Re:devil is in the detail

[nguy]

As long as you are editing/viewing someone else's Office Live Document, the same is true.

Office Live doesn't let people create or edit Word, PowerPoint, or Excel files from the browser. And it doesn't work with Firefox on Linux at all (not because of Linux, but because Microsoft has disabled it).

Same with Office Live. Different way of "seeing" and I prefer Google's but both work.

In Google Docs, when one user selects and changes a cell in a spreadsheet, all other users see that in real time in their own application instances. Office Live doesn't have anything like that.

More to the point, I'd be curious to know about how easy those mashups are to create in Google Docs. I guess I've got more research to do! ;)

Very easy. Many on-line services accept Google Docs as sources and/or sinks, you can create mashups with Google Gadgets by simply selecting a range and a gadget in the spreadsheet (and then publish the Gadget), and you can design an input form right in Docs.

The ease of use for inviting others is the same.

I can't even sign up from Linux, the sign-up process is buggy, and there doesn't seem to be anything like Google Apps.

(Free as in beer vs. works with 100% of your current documents.)

It's a myth that MS Office works with 100% of MS Office documents; there are serious version incompatibilities, font problems, and macro problems.

In fact, I find the limits Google Docs imposes on formatting to be an advantage because it keeps people from wasting their time and my time by adding tricky features to documents.

Re:devil is in the detail

[uptownguy]

Office Live doesn't let people create or edit Word, PowerPoint, or Excel files from the browser.

Except that is 100% not true. Since I did that yesterday. I shared a document with someone else. She edited it. Directly from her browser. I honestly didn't expect it to work because of what I'd read here on Slashdot. I'm not trying to convert anyone here, just share what I found out yesterday for myself.

Sometimes I'm shocked how much people pass off second-hand or third-hand information instead of rolling up their sleeves and trying it out for themselves... Not trying to knock you, personally. I just think from reading what Office Live "can't do" it's clear that there are some misinformed people. I was trying to clear up some of that misinformation. We aren't football fans backing "our" team. We're professionals fascinated by technology. Right?

Not likely...

[TripMaster Monkey]

From TFA:

But the future's not all doom and gloom just because of Google's progress in bringing unplugged versions of cloud apps to users. Microsoft would be smart to be extremely observant about the end user experience, user feedback and usage patterns of Google Doc users, and then plow that knowledge back into Windows Live and other Microsoft Mesh efforts.

So...all Microsoft has to do to avoid defeat is listen to their customers?

Yeah...just not seeing that happening...

Bingo

[sakdoctor]

Virtual apps, streamed or live on the cloud. Unplugged. Mesh.
The summary was full of buzz words so I had to RTFA...which was also full of buzzwords

What I don't get is why basic office application are not better off on your local machine, or even OO.org on a flashdisk along with your documents, than on google's or microsofts server being analysed every which way.

Re:Bingo

[Cid Highwind]

What I don't get is why basic office application are not better off on your local machine, or even OO.org on a flashdisk along with your documents, than on google's or microsofts server being analysed every which way.

Because no matter how many people work on a "cloud" document, there's only one version of one app to worry about. When Google rolls out a new feature, you can actually use it right away instead of worrying about how it will render on your local copy of OO.o 2.1 versus my 3.0 beta versus Joe's copy of MS Office 07. Add to that the ability to trade docs by sending a url instead of an email attachment (which is almost certain to get trashed a spam filter or overzealous IT "NO ATTACHMENTS!" policy the first time you email a new contact) and it looks pretty compelling. I still wouldn't use it for anything confidential (same goes for gmail), but I can see the appeal for a lot of people.

Flamebait

[Hassman]

Can I flag this story as a flamebait?

plugged vs unplugged

[thrillseeker]

There's no guarantee users will like the unplugged versions of cloud apps.

Having to use a plugged, especially plugged-only and "internet as an afterthought", application is akin to having to drive down to the theater to watch a movie - sure the big screen is nice, but putting up with all the downsides is less and less attractive and the screens are getting smaller and the popcorn is getting more and more stale.

Meanwhile, using an app that easily unplugs is like having my favorite movies available anytime (that is, with an acceptable delay in feedback time) - I can watch on the (upcoming) Mitsubishi Laser TV whatever hi-def I had downloaded to the PS3, listening on the fine audio system, enjoying the whole affair with a group I can choose, and having an ice cold Becks with hot off the stove popcorn. Yeah, it's a little extra work, for now, but it's much more appealing.

Re:Is this "in the browser" functionality

[GuldKalle]

I haven't read TFA, but my guess is that it's using google gears to provide offline capability. Available for win+mac+Linux on Firefox and IE6+

not to slam Google but...

[Speare]

But then again, just because Google is making faster progress doesn't mean much.

I enjoy watching Google beat the snot out of the previous 900lb gorilla as much as the next guy, but this was an understatement. All too often, Google has done the interesting 80% of the functionality and leaves the boring 20% of the cleanup, followthrough, polish and finish languishing in "beta" stage for months, years, forever. That's the 80/20 rule: the boring 20% is actually 80% of the sweat and toil to make a solid product/service.

Re:not to slam Google but...

[Hangtime]

Amen brother. Google likes to build the 80% thinking no one uses the 20% and on average this would be correct. If you look at usability most folks don't use the higher end functions out of Excel (one of my pet pivs when Microsoft updated to 2007 and the ribbon). But if you look at all the advanced functionality (Sub-Totals, OFFSET(), VLOOKUP(), Validation, Goal Seek, Solver, Add-Ins, Macros, Data Analysis pack, Consolidate, STANDARDIZE(), Percentile(), etc.), however, the chances of any Excel user using at least one of these function thus one function within the 20% is very high and is a gotcha. Everyone complains about feature bloat in Office, but the beauty of the suite is that it will give you that one function you might need to make your life infinitely easier even if it isn't used by 99.9% of all the other users. Ultimately, this is why Google will have limited success. Its not fun building features for a few thousand or a few hundred users, but this is how you build your userbase by catering to smaller and smaller niches of folks who will gladly pay you money to purchase your software.

Re:not to slam Google but...

[Hangtime]

Which explains why everybody and their dog wants to work at Google. Would that all software projects were run this way. Usually, 80% is more than good enough and the last 20% usually isn't worth the effort, except to PHBs and PHBeancounters. And to the goobers posting to comment sections

Of course this is if everyone is using the same program for the same purpose. Its called gold plating. However, when it comes to the Office Suite everyone has a a different way of using the program. Take for example this comment within the thread.

i would use gdocs more often if i could do endnotes / footnotes with it.

lack of these is a deal-killer for me, and i imagine many in the academic world. the idea of chipping away at a paper in different offices and around the world is quite appealing to me, especially if i can collaborate on it. /I.

I would say endnotes and footnotes fall into that 20% category. I certainly don't use them and neither do my colleagues. Of course within academia I would think they would be vitally important. Of course, then you start looking at the rest of the missing functionality and saying what else do I need to add and you end up where the Office Suite is today. While everyone will never use every piece of functionality within Word, everyone probably belongs to at least one 1% population that is using Word in a different way today. In fact, its the closest thing we have in the software world to being all things to all people.

You really think MS faces the bigger task?

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Microsoft wants to do the same, but in reverse, and faces an infinitely bigger challenge: rebuild Microsoft apps so they can become cloud enabled while pulling its giant channel (and embedded software) along in the process.

You really think MS faces the bigger task? MS has widely accepted desktop and server apps already, and a working framework for companies to build a back end with database, web and other common services. I'd think MS would face the easier challenge here; all they need to do is convince people to swap out (outsource) their core corporate back end processing in favor of similar services hosted by Microsoft.

Google's challenge seems to be to convince companies to outsource their core corporate back end processes using brand new back end applications and desktop apps that just came out of beta. That seems like the tougher hill to climb.

In either case, the challenge isn't new; "cloud computing" seems like just version 10 of the outsourced processing pitch that's been used in the computing industry for at least 40 years - just ask EDS, IBM, Unisys, etc.

Re:You really think MS faces the bigger task?

[Gybrwe666]

Yes, actually, it does. And it has nothing to do with technical prowess.

Right now Microsoft is making their money as a box mover. They create physical products, and then sell them to people. This is currently the way that they have become one of the largest corporations on earth. This entire model is predicated on a very traditional method of utilizing the channel (distributors, resellers, direct sales, etc.)

This one nasty fact has created a huge boondogle for Microsoft. In order to keep their share price where its at, they need to keep moving product. In order to move to a different meshed network, or online/offline model, there is a very real possibility that Microsoft will end up cannabalizing its own products. Not only that, but there is the very real possibility that such a product, in the face of a competitor with equal or better name recognition, will fail.

For the last 5-7 years, Microsoft stock has not exactly prospered, even if you normalize the data against the larger market. The growth hasn't been there. So any misstep by MS in Ray Ozzie's new world could conceivably be quickly and severely punished by the market.

Microsoft faces a far greater challenge, how to undo the existing, traditional, established model of delivery, upon which their stock price is dependent, while moving to a new, untested, difficult to assess, impossible to value model.

Google, on the other hand, has neatly sidestepped the issue by giving software away, creating an entire universe where its okay to use live customers as beta testers (nay, they actually leave billable products as beta for years and years), and they have the quick ability to make/undo changes to code, even on the new apps that allow for offline content, since your endusers are likely to realize that downloading the latest version is a Good Thing To Do.

If Microsoft were go come out with a eighth-baked product like Google Spreadsheets and actually sell it to business customers, they'd be crucified (see Windows ME and Vista, in fact). Google does it and the world cheers, and a good chunk of the geeks download it, play with it, and help make it better. For free.

Bill

Writely

[heffrey]

Google didn't hardly delivered Docs in the cloud first, it bought Upstartle and inherited Writely which then was rebranded as Docs.

SaaS is a trend, not an enduring technology

[Anonymous Coward]

There's two competing paradigms that are going to define the market for the future: web-based Software as a Service (SaaS), and its nemesis, old software industry styled computing as a service (CaaS).

SaaS relies on you buying the OS or installing a free one, ditto for browser, and then using your applications online. Problems include: portability of your data, privacy, control of your data and its removal, the unreliablity of internet connections, and the unreliablity of browsers. Advantages: it's free, no IT department controls it, and someone else updates it. Google is the champion of this paradigm.

CaaS takes the current computing paradigm, in which you buy a computer, buy or download an OS or software, and maintain it yourself (or have an IT department do it if your business is big enough) and makes it subscription based. Somewhat realistically, it insists on this being a pay service, which as the internet ad bonanza begins to fade, seems sensible. Problems include: what happens if you don't keep up your subscription, unreliability of network software delivery, large companies like MSFT having knowledge of what's on your computer. Advantages: your software stays current, you can buy additional software and services from a trusted vendor, you know what your patch level is. Old software -- MSFT, Adobe, even Apple -- are the champions of this paradigm.

http://www.chrisblanc.org/blog/information-technology/2008/03/24/computing-as-a-service/

Basically, while mesh computing sounds cool, it's a regression to a cheap form of thin client interaction. It adds nothing other than someone else maintaining your software for you, which Microsoft will do for their software, as will some Linux distros, automatically. Ignore the hype and the trends, look for the enduring technologies... that's the engineer's way.

Re:Is this "in the browser" functionality

[nguy]

It is in-browser. It uses Google Gears, a small open source extension that makes it easy for people to turn on-line apps into off-line apps. It works on major platforms and browsers, including Windows, Windows Mobile, MacOS, and Linux. Remember The Milk, Zoho Office, and others are already using Google Gears, as is Google Reader.

Google Docs off-line was an obvious use for Google Gears, and the main question is: why did it take so long?

It's a good bet that off-line versions of GMail and Google Calendar are next.

Paragraphs are part of the 20%

[metamatic]

Well, in the case of Google Docs, there's no easy way to make paragraph breaks and linebreaks appear different. That, to me, is pretty much a showstopper.

Good luck

[dodgedodge]

"Good luck with that"?? Doesn't M$ currently have like 90% of the office market? I think its Google that needs luck.

Re:Is this "in the browser" functionality

[nizo]

Google Gears installs a browser extension that adds a JavaScript API that enables the browser scripts to access the local datastore. The extension requires Firefox or Internet Explorer and works on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux.[2] A version for Safari is now available to developers. Currently, Google Reader is the only Google application that is supported, though other web applications such as Remember the Milk have added Google Gears functionality. The transition from online to offline mode and back has to be done manually in Google Reader because of the differences in data being transferred. Other applications, such as Remember the Milk, transition from online to offline mode and back seamlessly.

From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Gears

Not a good comparison

[notaprguy]

Making Google apps available offline is not particularly interesting. Wow...local storage...you mean like a decent Mac or Windows application offers? Syncrhonizing files up to a Web site is fairly trivial. In terms of offering the ability to synchronize files from a local store up to "cloud storage" Microsoft acquired Groove 3-4 years ago which was doing that years before. Not news. I'm no expert with inside information but if I know Microsoft I'd guess that they're thinking about making "mesh" into a platform for applications by anybody, not just Microsoft. That's what Microsoft is (usually) pretty good at. Providing a capability that would allow appliations and data to "roam" with the user as they move from device to device would be neat. Then I can use high fidelity applications on a Mac or PC when I have access to one or I can access degared versions of the apps (AJAX, Silverlight, Flash blah blah blah) when I don't have access to local applications.

Re:Anybody know what file format it's saved in?

[Nakago4]

Google also can be used to find answers to questions on the internet!

http://docs.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=49008&topic=8613

You can save it locally in Word, OpenOffice, RTF, PDF, HTML or zip

stop making things up

[nguy]

100% wrong. I don't know how new the feature is, but Office Live has let you do this for some time. Please don't spread FUD.

I have Office Live up on my screen. It does not support browser-based editing.

Perhaps you're confusing some kind of MS Office ActiveX embedding with browser-based editing. Or maybe you're simply lying.

Really? I've never come across one...

Well, evidently, you're living under a rock.

care to show us some examples?

Go read the Google Docs API documentation, or just try out one of the many third party Google Docs gadgets; they're a right click away in Google Spreadsheets.

Ah yes, the "fewer features are better" view. Seriously?

Within this context, it's not a view, it's a fact. Seriously.

Re:No luck required

[aweraw]

Yeah. So sorry, Slashdot, but all the rational companies aren't buying the "DUNT BE TEH EVEL!!11" schtick. We'll stick with a company with a proven track record of being committed to the needs of businesses, thank you very much. That's funny... Every technology conference I've been to in recent times has had speakers recommending businesses begin evaluating Google Docs as a replacement for Office - most say that it's more than sufficient for most purposes, and getting better everyday.

So sorry, AC, but all the rational IT practitioners are listening to industry chatter, and aren't buying the rantings of an unidentifiable slashdot user wearing a tinfoil hat