Ballmer Admits Google Apps Are Biting Into MS Office

twitter points out coverage of a discussion between Steve Ballmer and two Gartner analysts in which the Microsoft CEO admits that Google Apps is enjoying an advantage over Office by users who want to share their documents. He points to Office Live as their response to Google, and adds, "Google has the lead, but, if we're good at advertising, we'll compete with them in the consumer business." Whether or not they're good at advertising is still in question, if their recent attempts are any indication. Ballmer also made statements indicating some sort of arrangement with Yahoo! could still be in the works, but Microsoft was quick to step on that idea. Regarding Windows Vista, he said Microsoft was prepared for people to skip it altogether, and that Microsoft would be "ready" when it was time to deploy Windows 7.

Comments

Well, here we go

[morgan_greywolf]

Regarding Windows Vista, he said Microsoft was prepared for people to skip it altogether, and that Microsoft would be "ready" when it was time to deploy Windows 7.

If you ask me, Windows 7 looks a lot like a response to Linux on the desktop. Now's the time for OSS developers to step up to plate and deliver a solution that will make Windows 7 look like child's play. I'm game.

Re:Well, here we go

[Darkness404]

If you ask me, Windows 7 looks a lot like a response to Linux on the desktop. Now's the time for OSS developers to step up to plate and deliver a solution that will make Windows 7 look like child's play. I'm game.

Technologically, Linux and OS X are light years ahead of Windows, and will be by Windows 7. The problem is, some people will never use Linux unless it has a uniform UI (which, have you ever seen Windows?, Linux's UI is more uniform than even all of MS's products.) and other will not move to Linux unless *insert specialty application or game* is available on Linux. Still, the vast majority of users will use whatever is on their computer, be it Linux, Vista, XP, OS X, BSD, etc.

Re:Well, here we go

[emailandthings]

Linux is like the electric car... how so? Not a chance...

Re:Well, here we go

[Nursie]

The enterpirse space is embracing linux. It's a major player in the server space and enterprise desktops are getting more linux friendly all the time (it's an option at our enterprise).

Re:Well, here we go

[techno-vampire]

You ask some good questions and make some good points. However, I can tell you one place where Linux (and, AFAIK FreeBSD) are light years ahead of anything from Microsoft and have been for years: Linux partitions don't need regular defragging. They can go for years without needing one and, unless they're over 80% full or so and have large files that are constantly changing they probably never will. This isn't because the file system itself is better, but because Linux doesn't jam the files one right next to the other like Windows does; it leaves room between them for growth. If MS really wanted to "embrace and extend," they'd rewrite the part of the OS that decides where files go to be more like the Linux model and do away with defrag altogether.

Re:Well, here we go

[SanityInAnarchy]

Viruses - THis is not a OS problem, its a user problem.... Malware - Again not specific to Windows.

Granted.

But I'll take an OS any day that works with me on this problem, not against me. Yes, Windows is trying to improve with Vista -- too little, too late. Too many programs that won't scale to limited user accounts, no unified system-wide updates.

Prove conclusively, once and for all that X percentage of crashes are because of MS code, Vs. X percentage of crashes on Linux.

Doesn't matter. If the crashes were because of a driver (that is, the manufacturer's fault), and Linux has a more solid driver for that (but it's in-kernel, and therefore unofficial), then Linux wins that argument.

Drivers - Add all the drivers to the kernel? So the manufacturers of devices have to wait till the kernel maintainer decides on his own sweet time when to integrate patches. AND THEN wait till picks them up downstream.

This assumes several things:

- That all drivers must be in the kernel source. There are drivers which are separately maintained, just like on Windows.
- That all drivers are even in-kernel. The bulk of printer drivers, for example, are PPDs, used by CUPS -- entirely userspace.
- That the kernel maintainer is the one integrating. Nope, that's up to you. The kernel maintainer just decides if your patch makes it into the kernel. Nothing stopping you from maintaining it as a separate module, or letting distros merge it into their own kernel forks.
- That the kernel maintainer is a different person than the manufacturer.
- That the manufacturer is even involved in the process, beyond publishing specs.
- That any of this is remotely an issue for OS X. Apple pretty much gets to pick and choose what hardware will be supported, and how.

All the software in the world at a single spot. i.e. Google for applications.

Or search your package manager.

Who addresses commercial software? Who handles payments for this? Who will handle updates?

If you're on Ubuntu, the answer to all of the above is "Canonical". I can buy Parallels directly from Canonical, add an official repository, and install it (and get updates) through the same channels I install all my other software.

Or you could ask Dell how they handle the Fluendo codecs. I'm betting it's the same mechanism, though.

Do users want to download Multi GB Games/Applications?

I don't know that I've seen a multi-GB downloadable game or application for Linux. Sure, the whole distro is huge, but individual apps aren't, even when you factor in needed libraries.

Note: That was "downloadable". Most games for Linux come in a small-ish demo form through the repositories. If you buy the full game (for Windows, presumably), you can copy the game files off the disc, type in the CD key, and you've now got the full game -- but the patches still come through the package manager. Honestly, the binaries are small enough.

Who pays for the massive bandwidth?

Again, Canonical.

Are you not aware of how existing package managers work, for existing apps?

What if you're not connected online

Then, presumably, you get a disc which has the files on it. Granted, no one's built a disc that is specifically a compilation of all the demo versions of various games -- but it could be done.

I'll wait for some real responses now...

I actually like the UI.

And I like the fact that if I didn't like the UI, there are dozens (hundreds?) of window managers, all compatible enough that I can run any Linux app on them -- or write my own.

I like the fact that I can have both a rock-solid OS (and one which doesn't nag me all the time) and better desktop effects than Vi

Re:Well, here we go

[hairyfeet]

Hell,I'll probably get flamed to negative 1000 for this,but what the hey,I've got Karma to burn. If you want to know how to get Joe and Jane home user(along with Sam SMB) I'll be happy to tell you. As someone who has been working in PC repair more years than I care to count,as well as someone who tried to sell Linux boxes and watched them rot on the shelves,I can happily tell you the problems that need fixing. Here they are-

1.-Make an ndiswrapper for those damned Lexmark all in one printers! Surely it can't be anymore difficult than those funky wireless "cards" which are nothing but a firmware chip and Windows. Those Lexmarks ain't changed in ages and are calling Windows GDI for everything so surely someone who can code ought to be able to figure that one out. But WAY too many of the home users(probably 85-95% here) have one of those damned printers. They are cheap,make good pictures,and do what they want it to do,so they WON'T go buy a $150 printer just to use a new and strange OS.
2.-Games. Even those girls that say "Eeew,games are stupid and I can't see why you waste you time with those!" actually have at least one game they play(for some reason it is almost always AoE ! or II. I swear it is like catnip to females). While Wine is nice in theory,it is just too damned complex for Joe and Jane. It needs to work when you stick a disc in,ala "clicky clicky,next next next". If they can stick their Windows game disc and go Clicky Clicky,then they are happy campers. Which brings me to number three-
3.-WalMart and Best Buy. Joe and Jane don't want to find their software by looking through some repo and trying to figure out what they want by some description that may be over their heads,they want to look at pretty pictures with simple descriptions so it is easy to choose. So maybe someone can talk Shuttleworth into either packaging similar Linux programs(games pack,office pack,school pack,etc) into a nice set of CD or DVDs that can sit on a shelf,or perhaps have the repos have nice little screenshots of the apps with very simple descriptions and a "learn more" button that would give a more in depth explanation.
4.-Finally for the SMBs. MSFT may hate it and just wish it would die,but there is a damned good reason why VB6 is still the number three business language. It is because VB is the engine that runs many a SMB. I can't count the number of times I've walked into a place and their mission critical app,be it a POS,a billing app,customer database,etc, was a VB app.For SMBs VB just works and works well for those little "one of a kind" personalized apps that all SMBs seem to have a need for. An easy to use VB plugin would go a long way to converting your SMBs. Sadly though you'll never be able to convert around 25% thanks to those damned IE Intranet ActiveX laden "apps".

So there you have it,my suggestions for switching Joe and Jane and Sam without having them go running back to Windows at the first sign of trouble. While some would probably be easiest to fix by helping out the ReactOS guys(and I'm sure they'd like the help) others like the repo idea could be implemented by any major distro with some work. But these are the ones that have been deal breakers when I have tried to convert users to Linux. Maybe if Win7 turns into a giant pile of super suck like Vista it will be easier to get them to switch. Or maybe they'll just do like most of my current customers and hang onto XP for dear life,I just don't know. But having even just 1 and 3 would go a LONG way to helping guys like me switch the customers I see walk through my door.

Re:Well, here we go

[techno-vampire]

Couldn't this be a case where *both* sides are partially right? Microsoft filesystems could be better designed. Linux filesystems could use a defragger. I'm certainly not too proud to admit defragging is a good idea!

There actually are defraggers for Linux, I'm told, but it's rare to need one. And, because they shove everything down to one end of the drive, they spoil the advantage in seek time that comes from keeping the heads halfway up. I've seen it claimed that it's better to back everything up, reformat and restore so that you end up with everything well spread out again but I'd not argue the point.

And, while I'm thinking about it, it's not that the Microsoft filesystems are badly designed, it's that Windows is programmed to put files one right after the other so that there's no room for growth and files quickly fragment. Microsoft doesn't need to rework NTFS, they need to rework their file location algorithm.

Google Apps is pretty useful

[yppiz]

I started a company last year, and I could have chosen to either: a) set up a Windows Server and buy multiple Office licenses, or b) sign up for Google Docs.

Docs has worked out really well for us.

Re:Google Apps is pretty useful

[zmjjmz]

Or just install OpenGoo on a Linux server and have everyone work from there. This way you own the documents you upload.

This is a not true

[tkrotchko]

I was there at the talk. What Ballmer said (and I'm paraphrasing) is that Google Apps have no audience; user growth plateaued months ago and that in their (MS's) own studies almost all college students buy MS Office and use it. He said the only time students are using Google Apps is when they need to collaborate on projects but he talked about how MS is working to beef up their own collaboration tools in Office 2007/08.

Really guys, this is reaching.

Ballmer is a good entertaining speaker, and Gartner analysts are not going to outfox the guy.

MS Office file formats are becoming the odd ones

[gelfling]

In my firm, which is a Fortune 50 company, we're actively abandoning MS Office for our own modification of Open Office. In fact OO3 does everything better - it handles all the problems of earlier versions like embedded OLE objects, it handles all our all 'legacy' junk AND it handles all of the various MS Office 2007 file formats which, as everyone knows were invented JUST to force people to lock in and upgrade. In fact all those Office 2007 formats are becoming the weird occasional exception for us as we move to ODF and such. Mostly we use MS Office 2007 formats as a required translation step from DOC to ODF since OO3 handles it that way by default: DOC > DOCX > ODF for instance.

So being weird and unique, Balmer, we don't care. Soon MS Office will be just another legacy format we keep around for archival purposes like Lotus Wordpro, 123, AmiPro and the like. Good luck with that, Steve.

Emacs -vs- Emacs

[SL Baur]

I am a big fan of (the basic GNU) Emacs, because it's so easy to edit with a nice blank screen rather than all having those superfluous menubars and whatnot cluttering up the workspace.

There is no doubt about it, the Emacs architecture has won the day. Microsoft uses a poorly reimplemented model for everything nowadays. The ability to modify behavior of an application with a full-fledged computer language was truly innovative. http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs-paper.html

(My perspective is of one who remembers when Emacs was a bunch of macros for TECO, so I never got into the habit of using a menubar.) And now that GNU Emacs can render fonts nicely in X11, XEmacs has become even more otiose.

I happen to like menubars, scrollbars and GUI and that's why I was attracted to XEmacs in order to fix the deficiencies in 19.14.

You can always turn off that sort of stuff in XEmacs. My first commercial use of XEmacs was as an embedded editor in a Process Control System that only had access to PC console tty.

But ... if it bothers you, no problem. At least you're not using something loathesome like VIM. (nvi is nice though).

And XEmacs has as much right to be called "GNU Emacs" as the one sitting on gnu.org, but that is an argument for a different day.