Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Office 2010, Dissected
CWmike notes a review by Preston Gralla of the soon-to-be-released Microsoft Office 2010. "I review plenty of software packages throughout the course of a year, and it's rare that I come across one that I believe will truly make a difference in the way that I work or use my computer. With Office 2010, which recently hit RTM status, it is one of those times. The main attraction, as far as I'm concerned, is the Outlook makeover that makes it far easier to cut through e-mail overload and keep up with your ever-expanding group of contacts on social networking sites. There's also an improved Ribbon that now works across all Office applications, and some very useful new PowerPoint tools for giving Internet-based presentations and handling video. Question is: Is Office 2010 good enough to stop the defection to Google Apps? Some large enterprises are seriously considering jumping from Exchange to Gmail, or already have, reports Robert Mitchell. The final version of Microsoft Office Web Apps, the Web-based version of Office, isn't yet available but is expected before summer."
As a former CIO, I disagree with your diagnosis of the issues. Many companies, both large and small, outsource services to companies with access to all manner of sensitive materials (e.g., documentation destruction, electronic reading rooms, business continuity services, AR, etc). The difference is how those services are implemented and the trust in the organizations, not so much the laws that specifically regulate their offerings or even the ability to sue them.
In my opinion, the problem with Google Apps is that they:
1) don't make many important explicit commitments (e.g., availability, security, retention policies, restoration times, etc)
2) provide very little visibility into their implementation
3) their low cost service model provides little room for day-to-day customer service (e.g., mailbox restore) and the confidence to know that you can rapidly escalate a problem should one arise (not to mention offline backup)
I say this because this implies the issue is not inherent to outsourcing email in principle. The outsource service model is the future for generally commoditized services like email. There are several offerings today that I believe are generally superior to in-house for most SMBs that want Exchange functionality and need good availability. I have recommended Rackspace's Hosted Exchange to a $60M (revenues) client of mine and a few others. I am generally quite pleased with it, though there are a few shortcomings that will prevent others from adopting it today (especially larger organizations).
The biggest issues with the various Hosted Exchange offerings (those I'm familiar with at least):
#1: Authentication cannot be readily shared with other services, i.e., the employees need to juggle yet one more set of credentials.
#2: Limited ability to use 3rd party software (e.g., VM, Fax, two-factor authentication systems, etc) unless it exclusively uses exposed interfaces (RPC/HTTP, IMAP, etc).
#3: Won't scale well with large companies (with multiple subsidiaries/operating companies) that need/want to use more advanced AD features.
That said, these companies will figure most of this stuff out gradually until all but the most conservative big companies concede that they are better off outsourcing it, i.e., that an outside company has the scale and expertise to do a better job at less cost and in a more capital friendly way. When real customization is required then in-house makes sense, but the reality is that many of these issues are fairly widely felt and can be addressed with more generalized solutions.
1. 32 and 64-bit versions of the software. Apparently this addresses various performance issues, but also means there is incompatibility with 32-bit versions of other office apps (and perhaps visual studio) on 64-bit OS.
2. MAK and KMS replace the use-anywhere, no activation open license key. Heh.
3. There are fewer editions of office this time around, missing Enterprise. I guess that is a good decision, but there should be fewer. Nevertheless Microsoft believes strongly in market segmentation.
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
Top posting makes since because I already read everything up until the reply. All I need is the new information. Scrolling to the bottom of every f'ing message I get that's part of a larger conversation is a colossal waste of time, especially since most replies are one or two lines long. I don't need to digest the messages to read later. I just need to read whatever was added to the conversation and have the original text available in the rare case I need to look at it.
when they pry it from my cold dead hands.
Regardless of anything else, I just have never seen any reason to keep secure, mission critical data in another companies data center. Especially email with all of its legal implications.
SaaS (or cloud or whatever buzzword you want to use) has its place. Spam filtering is a great example. Economies of scale, easy setup, reduced internal overhead. The data that flows through is not stored in any meaningful fashion.
But as soon as you are talking about storing data, you lose me. So many issues, so little time.
I unfortunately don't have much experience with Visual Studio, so I won't be able to offer any shining insights on that, but I'll take your invitation to elaborate anyway.
The improvements in the core (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, and OneNote) Office 2010 applications over their Office 2007 counterparts are very minor. The most notable change is a customizable "Ribbon," so you can move buttons around on the user interface. Also, the OneNote application is significantly improved with the addition of a "recycle bin" for recently deleted notes, enhanced notebook sharing, and a host of smaller improvements that really add up to a totally new experience. The rest of the improvements are incremental and unimaginative. Word has a new navigation and find/replace interface. Excel has slightly fancier charts. PowerPoint lets you edit videos. Outlook finally catches up to Gmail with "conversation view."
The other headline change in Office 2010 is the addition of the browser-based applications. But these web applications aren't even really ready for primetime yet, and you can get access to a browser-based Office without buying 2010.
These changes are all well and good, but does any of this seriously and significantly improve the daily workflow of an Office 2007 user? Probably not, unless you really need one of the new features. If you're looking for a "general upgrade," Office 2010 is way too expensive to justify. Wait for the next version.
>as long as Outlook continues to encourage top-posting and HTML formatted content
1996 called. Its looking for its outrage.