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."

31 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 Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Have to agree! It surprises me given that Google do (or did) sell application servers for search, they didn't do the same with their Apps suite; I'm sure loads of corporates would be happy to purchase their own box with support.

    4. Re:Googles playbook by DSmith1974 · · Score: 4, Informative

      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?

      You are aware that all Google Docs can be backed up locally with Google Gears and also converted into a number of popular formats?

      --
      It is not immoral to create the human species - with or without ceremony, Samuel Clemens.
    5. Re:Googles playbook by Shamenaught · · Score: 5, Informative

      Can I just add a [citation needed] to that "history of easily folding to law enforcement" statement? Last time I checked, they fought harder than Yahoo or Microsoft when they were subpoenaed for search data.

      --
      mysql> SELECT * FROM `places` WHERE `place` LIKE 'home`; Empty set (0.00 sec)
    6. Re:Googles playbook by TheP4st · · Score: 5, Informative

      Which is different from bribing the disgruntled sys-admin at the company, how?
      In many cases even a underpaid, undervalued, overworked EDS 1st line worker can have access to very sensitive data on the customers servers and PC's. I certainly did back in the days when I worked/slaved for them.

      --
      "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
    7. Re:Googles playbook by DSmith1974 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes you can, Gears will sync the two whenever the link becomes available again - meaning you can edit your docs on the plane, bus, with or without connectivity, etc.

      --
      It is not immoral to create the human species - with or without ceremony, Samuel Clemens.
    8. 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.

    9. Re:Googles playbook by DSmith1974 · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, not like that, the Google-Apps (writer, spreadsheet, etc.) are downloaded to your PC and you use them from there. So it's still the same mini-office suite that it is on-line and you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference (that is; the move from on-line to off-line mode is seamless). Or you can still just use them through a browser from any PC like you always did. MS/OO/3rd party tools don't come into it.

      --
      It is not immoral to create the human species - with or without ceremony, Samuel Clemens.
    10. 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.

    11. Re:Googles playbook by QuantumRiff · · Score: 4, Informative

      They have a history of easily folding to law enforcement, which makes me uneasy about hosting corporate stuff online.

      Actually, I remember google being the ONLY web search company that stood up to the DOJ when they wanted all search data from a random sampling of users. The DOJ was arguing the constitutionality of some "think of the children" legislation about blocking on the internet...

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    12. 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.
    13. 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. I use Microsoft to fight the evil G$$Gle empire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am against huge monopolies controlling everything we do on our computers with their close sourced spy crapware. Down with the G$$G-borg! Fight for Microsoft! Up with freedom!

    Microsoft Word is an amazingly innovative and capable program. It does everything I need with an intuitive interface that even your grandmother could use, but is l33t enough for the geekiest power user. Plus, it's free! All power to Microsoft, fight the evil corporate empires!!!!

    1. Re:I use Microsoft to fight the evil G$$Gle empire by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Funny

      And when did it's interface become intuitive?

      Press a key on the keyboard and a similarly shaped glyph appears on the screen. That's pretty intuitive. It's also about as far as most people make it.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  3. Wow by somersault · · Score: 5, Funny

    analyst Sheri McLeish, suggests that businesses may still be using [insert-any-application-here] because it is familiar to users or because they have a legacy investment in the application, not because it is the best option

    What an amazing insight! Who would have suspected such a thing?

    --
    which is totally what she said
    1. Re:Wow by Samschnooks · · Score: 4, Funny
      Shhhhhh!

      I work for a large international IT research firm and I just comb Slashdot, filtering for only +5 comments, and then plagiarize what I see and put it in my report.

      The sucky part is, when I first started, I forgot to filter out the "+5 Funny" comments. So, in my reports, you'd see "In Soviet Russia, Ms Word You!" and "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of MS Word" and so on. I got fired from my first job. But I got it down now.

  4. I have never liked word. by mbone · · Score: 4, Funny

    I always feel I am fighting it to get it to do what I want. If I wanted to fight computers, I would buy computer games.

  5. Re:The way I write by Daengbo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's a video explanation of why you shouldn't e-mail documents. I completely agree with it. Creating twenty-five copies of the same document at various revisions is an error-prone habit.

  6. Re:File Compatibility, not Habit by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... 100% compatible ...

    Shee-yit, Word isn't 100% compatbile with Word documents ! I frequently need to 'repair' Word 2007 documents before I can re-open them. This of course begs the question, if Word can repair it, why doesn't it just open it ? This question is left as an exercise for the reader.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. Re:File Compatibility, not Habit by deniable · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's an improvement. In previous versions, I had to use OpenOffice to 'repair' documents that Word couldn't open. And yeah, different versions or even changing printers can make Word documents go flaky. (Of course, people not tweaking every little formatting parameter would make that less of a problem.)

  10. 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.
  11. 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.

  12. BS by gx5000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We will not be going on net for document creation... Get your heads out of the clouds and back to ground. The mere thought of being reliant on resources out of our control is insanity. The Bandwidth issue not withstanding, security and infrastructure concerns aside, this is folly and is meant to drive another INTERNET bubble of fools looking for the next big tech movement. Let's start talking about how better to organize what we have instead of watching repeats of William Shatner's Techwar ok ? Cripes.

    --
    End of Line.
  13. Re:Of course its out of habit by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I found that recompiling OO.o (it's a major BITCH! to do BTW)

    and changing things to say "word" and "excel" and the icons... in other words faking it to be the office suite was enough to fool a large swath of the office to believe they were using microsoft word and excel. just a different "version". we called it a service pack upgrade and swallowed it whole.

    It's mostly physiological with users. The same thing happens when you IE skin Firefox.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  14. Sore spot with me. by rindeee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is timely in that I just had a 'run-in' of sorts regarding MS Word usage and its consideration as a standard. My son is in sixth grade and, of course, has to write about 2 papers a month in his English class. He had his first official type-written paper this past couple of weeks and since we have no Windows computers and no MS Office/Word at home (all Linux, Solaris and Mac OS), we could not comply with the teacher's requirement for using MS Word with a Times New Roman font. Instead I had my son use Google Documents (which is what he's used since he started typing papers of any sort) with a Verdana font. He ended up receiving a D on the paper for not following instructions. The school has a computer lab, with Windows and MS Office, but that lab is only available to him during his assigned lab hours or after school. If he wants to use it after school, I have to pay for "After School Care" program. This kind of nonsense infuriates me. It's as if he can only write a reasonable paper if done so using MS products. Anyway, I just wrote the teacher last evening regarding coming to an agreement on things so that he doesn't suffer due to the school's devotion to MS products (a recent change as the entire school used to be Linux/OOo/etc.).

    1. Re:Sore spot with me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Doesn't Open Office support .doc files and Times New Roman font?

  15. Re:Next up: by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Interesting
    1. Ubuntu? Thanks, but I'll take a certified system like RHEL, SLES, or Solaris for government work. The certifications do actually represent something, even though I am sure a dozen or so slashdotters will have stories about some certified system being compromised (responses to compromise are part of the certification) or some non-certified system never being compromised (possible, nobody even denied this could happen).
    2. FREE does not mean "zero dollars." A switch to Ubuntu would be pricey, and while it is likely to save money in the long run, the up front cost is a factor and is likely higher than the yearly cost of running the various other systems the US government uses. My state is facing a budget crisis, I really don't think we need a mandate to switch to Ubuntu on the table when we are already looking at cutting funding for schools in the best case scenario.
    3. Judging by the quality of code I see out of my own classmates, at one of the top 50 universities in the US, I do not think I am very comfortable with the idea of government systems being run by college students. Canonical has not really demonstrated that they employ top notch programmers either, and beyond that, Canonical is not an American company (they are registered on the Isle of Man), so they are not in a position to deal with sensitive government systems. We have enough problems with government systems, let's not compound it.

    What Obama should do is mandate the use of open standards on certified systems. Let state and local governments figure out the cheapest way to implement such a standard. Really, it is irrelevant whether or not the government uses a free software operating system, as long as government documents are not in a proprietary format and as long as the government is not wasting money paying for its software (proprietary or free). What is needed is easier communication between different government departments and between the government and the people; the operating system that is used is not as important, as long as an open standard is in use.

    --
    Palm trees and 8