Google vs. Microsoft On the Desktop
Michael_Curator writes "Gary Edwards, president of the now-defunct Open Document Foundation, helps sort out the challenges Google faces displacing Microsoft on the desktop, pitting the strengths of Microsoft's proprietary stack against the developer candy that HTML 5 represents."
What I think would be best for Google would be to fork a version of OOo to include "Save to the cloud" support and integration with Google Docs. Along with integration with every e-mail client by using perhaps HTML e-mail or a plugin to enable Google Docs support. Create an iPhone app, plugins for MS Office, make it easy for anyone with any program to access and use Google Docs and it will succeed.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Yeah developer candy is first on my list when looking at a product as an end user. I mean stuff security, reliability, etc. That's just all rubbish when I can make my developers even more diabetic.
Who comes up with this nonsense?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
To give Microsoft something to seriously think about, Google needs an OS on the desktop. Android is a good start in my opinion. There are some efforts in this direction already. The good thing is that Android eschews X, which is a pain to work with in its current form.
Next, they will need [meaningful] applications that work no matter what platform one happens to be using.
Third, targeting Microsoft must not be the aim, it must be the unplanned outcome. The aim must be tp "please" we the users.
That way, Google will succeed on the desktop.
Microsoft actually contributed lots to HTML 5, at least according to Chris Wilson (Software Architect for IE)
In effect, it's like semi-Microsoft v. completely-Microsoft. (food for thought)
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
Microsoft is where it is today because it is the easiest OS for third parties to work with.
That's not even remotely true. I'm curious as to how you came to this conclusion? Are you simply comparing Windows with Linux (and most any other X11 based system)?
The reason for MS's success (specifically, with Windows) is due to developers targeting the dominant system, and Windows became the dominant system primarily through being installed on the overwhelming majority of PCs. None of this was based on being the most "developer-friendly".
This comment is way too similar in style to this other comment. I call shenanigans.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
IE 6 remains a major target that needs to be covered
No, it doesn't. IE 6 is a ghetto, and can be safely ignored. Anyone who currently uses IE 6 and either will not or can not upgrade to a modern browser is someone who isn't terribly concerned about using the types of apps that things like HTML 5 and Gears are meant to make possible.
Hey, uh, wasn't he one of the ones that threw a tantrum (along with sam and marbux) when he didn't get his way with preserving Microsoft "dark matter" (undocumented RTF encoding) in ODF and then proclaimed that ODF is doomed to fail and all that nonsense when everyone told him to stuff it where it doesn't shine??
I am shocked. Simply shocked to see that he's extolling Microsoft's "virtues".
Nothing to see here, folks, just another softie trying to sabotage open standards by throwing chairs at it.
--
BMO
If the cloud would only be about data storage there would be no advantage over a Desktop app that saves to my hard drive.
However, Desktop Software is totally behind when it comes to collaboration. I have sent enough "DOCs" around and received them back and edited them again and sent them around again to understand that it sucks badly. I have enough of "can you send me the latest version of ..." and welcome online apps to solve this gigantic and ridiculous problem. Of course i would prefer to have Desktop apps that do the same thing, but as it seems at the moment nobody can get their act together and do real time collaborative Editing in a way that is more meaningful than Gobby. :)
The standard desktop is better than Google desktop. Yes, everybody says, to put Google in a good light: "standard compliant" browsers, but that means nonstandard compliant mail, nonstandard everything else. We won't own software, we'll be always customers, dumb terminals, served from huge company's "clouds". Free software will be over, irrelevant. We won't be able to improve and modify our environment, we can't improve Gmail ourselves, there's no alternative/better/innnovative client for Gmail.
Economic forces are taking technology down a terrible path. The past is better: a world of protocols, servers and clients. A common neutral space...
The "portable" desktop, having your data everywhere should be solved by other means... I don't know, perhaps we should have personal servers, or at least we should contract personal servers from some kind of "personal server providers", which should be a standard and non-monopolistic thing. The "presence providers" envisioned by the XMPP protocol comes to mind...
Oh come on, Timmothy. Edwards has already been discredited for his astroturfing fake ODF news which he ran under the "Foundation" he's now moved his shit to Facebook and others. His foundation actively lobbied against ODF. He was a shill then, or at least one of Bill's "Useful Idiots", and he's the same now.
Oh... looks like the 5 minutes was to download a new version of Java or something.
And IE doesn't do that prompting, whereas Firefox does (at least on my setup).