Slashdot Mirror


Companies Using MS Word "Out of Habit," Says Forrester

An anonymous reader writes "A Forrester Research report has found that companies use Microsoft Word for word processing out of habit rather than necessity and are beginning to consider other alternatives as the Web has changed the way people create and share documents. The report, "Breaking Up Is Hard To Do: The Microsoft Word Love Story," by analyst Sheri McLeish, suggests that businesses may still be using Word because it is familiar to users or because they have a legacy investment in the application, not because it is the best option." Microsoft surely knows that some other options are creeping slowly into the view of even the most Word-centric users, though. User I dream about smoking writes "Microsoft is testing new capabilities for Office Live Workspace, its online adjunct to Microsoft Office, that will make it a closer rival to online application suites such as Google Docs. Microsoft will start beta testing an updated version of Live Workspace later this year that allows users to create and edit new documents online."

11 of 367 comments (clear)

  1. Googles playbook by TheKidWho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google took a page right out of Microsoft's playbook by buying a company who was already working on web based doc writers, effectively beating Microsoft to the game.

    Personally I wouldn't trust important documents to stay on the web server. What happens when google goes belly up and starts shutting down their web servers? The bigger a company gets, the bigger they fall.

    1. Re:Googles playbook by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On the other end of the spectrum, I don't trust other companies to protect my data. At least when data is stolen off servers I control I know who is to blame.

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    2. Re:Googles playbook by deemen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I doubt the weak link is often the actual administrator in charge of virtual security..

      Surely not, but the fact that Google is now hosting business services, they are quickly becoming the information sink of the universe. They have a history of easily folding to law enforcement, which makes me uneasy about hosting corporate stuff online. I just don't like all the big brother business, and while I use GMail for personal stuff, I wouldn't start trusting Google with sensitive documents, memos etc.

      Web based tools have another huge problem. You're at Google's mercy for upgrades, feature changes etc. Does anyone remember the crap they started with the iGoogle sidebar? That sort of stuff quickly discourages corporate clients.

    3. Re:Googles playbook by deemen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good link. I think it just proves that you can't trust the competitors to defend your personal information either.

      In the end, no one will defend your important documents more than you will, and that's why I doubt Google Docs will ever gain much market share in the enterprise sector until the day they allow it to be hosted on the intranet (like they do for their corporate search service).

      For small businesses it might be an interesting solution though. I think most people don't know much about security in general (not just computers), so hosting things on a Google server might be better than on your spyware ridden home office computer.

    4. Re:Googles playbook by jimicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It just takes some (pretty serious) change in your work-flow.

      Ding ding!

      It required you, someone who we can safely assume is fairly techie (or you wouldn't be posting to /.) to make some serious changes in your work-flow.

      Multiply those changes by everyone in the organisation and throw in re-building existing business process which expect Word documents and you now know how come it takes something pretty huge to make an organisation radically change the day to day operations of their business.

    5. Re:Googles playbook by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You DO realize that you just gave the "If you have nothing to hide" speech, don't you? Which is of course exactly what has become wrong with the USA and most of the west. There is a good reason why we must reject that argument and fight those that would implement it in government. Simply: power corrupts. There is a good reason why that phrase is so old and is yet used so frequently. Because it is a universal truth. Water is wet, the sky is blue, and power corrupts.

      We have already had 8 years of abuse of power here in the USA, and closer to 30 years of corrupt laws that were obviously written by "he who wrote the biggest check". So if you don't mind all my data will be kept where I can encrypt it however I want. And considering the wholesale wiretapping and the risk of state sponsored industrial espionage IMHO you'd have to be really crazy or really naive to just leave your data where anyone outside your company can get at it.

      And what about liability? Do they have a monetary guarantee to cover your losses if THEY get hacked and all your data gets handed to your competitor, thereby giving them your plans for the next 5 years? If YOU are in control of the data you can set security policy, limit who has access to which data, etc. But by passing it to "the cloud" you frankly have NO clue who has access to your data or if they are disgruntled and looking to make some cash on the way out. No thanks, doesn't sound too appealing to me. It just isn't worth the risks to me for a free doc editor and online collaboration.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    6. Re:Googles playbook by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While what you say is true, what I have been hearing from my SOHO and SMB customers is that they are sticking to older versions, even going so far as to go out and buy more copies of Office 2K3 off the net rather than switch. Why? Because of the damned ribbon! If MSFT wanted to make such a radical change then there should have been the option of going back to the "old style" if the user so chose. Not doing so was a BIG mistake IMHO.

      I have customers that have been using MS Office since the days of Office 97, some even earlier. They are so familiar with that interface they can "pop" the icon for what they want without ever even looking up. For users that have that kind of memorization(which I am finding out from OS repair is a LOT of users) switching around the locations of buttons is like a giant STOP sign. I watched it myself with little Velma at the insurance company I do repair and upgrade work for.

      Little Velma could be talking at you and "pop" the icons for the features she needed without even looking up. She could crank out business letters and Excel sheets for customers like nobodies business. When I went there to add a printer to their network the owner was fuming how they had been "picked" as part of the pilot program for Office 2K7(they were formally on Office 2K3) and boy was she pissed. She said "You know how fast Velma and Lisa are. Go out there and look!" and sure enough, she was right. Little Velma would type for a little bit and then stop and stare at the screen, trying to figure out which button she wanted. Then when she couldn't find it she would have to call up the help and scroll through that for awhile. Pretty much threw the brakes on her productivity.

      So if you want to know what is hurting MSFT, it isn't the competition, it is MSFT. IMHO they have lost their way and are floundering from one idea to the next trying to sustain the '90s growth they enjoyed which frankly ain't never coming back. They went from a company that made boring but usable business software and OSes to this giant multimedia mess that just screams "We can be as hip as Apple and as cool as Google! Yes we can! Quit laughing at me!" which is why my customers are hanging onto XP and Office 2K3 like a starving man hanging onto the last box of Fig Newtons. They need to fire Ballmer, bring back Allchin(and Darth Gates if they have to) and go back to making boring but familiar backwards compatible business OSes. Because mark my words. If they stay on the road that they have been following with Vista and 2K7, and remove the quicklaunch and taskbar for some Apple Dock ripoff, then Win7 will go down just as hard as Vista. Because if you are going to have to learn a new interface and buy all new gear, why not just go ahead and switch to Apple, which lasts longer, or Linux which has many distros with the XP interface?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Re:File Compatibility, not Habit by Mojo66 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not only compatibility to own existing documents, but also when exchanging documents with other businesses, especially documents that need to be edited. From my experience in a scientific environment, those who don't use Latex use Word, primarily because they are lazy, but often also because out of necessity when multiple authors are writing up a paper for example. The quintessence is, neither Windows nor Word is Microsoft's cash cow, but the .doc format.

  3. Re:MS Office has been online for years by argent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And it doesn't work very well. We're always playing musical chairs with documents whether they're on a sharepoint or file share.

  4. How hard can it be to switch? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How hard can it be to switch? This post will neither debate the advantages or disadvantages of word or wordprocessors. Just the latter... of users.

    Having recently had to interact with the "real world" and wordprocessor documents, I must say that I was astounded at the quality of output of wordprocessors. The main problem is that even technically capable people seem to refuse outright to make any effort to actually learn how to use a tool that they spend hours per day sitting in front of. They treat a wordprocessor as a typewriter with font effects and images.

    People still can't embed images properly. Either they're linked to some program which noone else has or a bitmap of a vector drawing so noone else can edit them. People still refuse to make even the most basic use of styles or cross referencing. It is absolutely astounding.

    People will happily put in HOURS per document on a daily basis, fiddlind around with font dialogs, instead of spending 1 our learning how to use styles, for instance.

    How hard can it be to switch? Users would go from not knowing how to use word to not knowing how to use openoffice.

    But it really does amaze me how people can use the same tool all day, every day for weeks at a time, or even more and still not know many of the most basic features. Sure people want to "get work done", but that is best achieved by becoming an expert in the tools of the trade. When was the last time you heard a carpenter refusing to learn how to use a power saw because he "needed to get work done"?

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  5. Re:File Compatibility, not Habit by Talar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And this is of course why you should avoid getting locked in with a proprietary file format in the first place.