Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Adds Microsoft Word, Excel Editing To Latest Chrome OS Build

Posted by timothy on from the assembling-voltron dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Google has added native Microsoft Office file editing to the dev channel for Chrome OS. The addition means Chrome OS users on the latest build of the company's browser-based operating system can now experiment with editing Microsoft Word and Excel files. The dev channel for Chrome OS is updated once or twice weekly. Since the feature has made it in there, it's likely to show up in the beta channel, and then eventually the stable channel. Today's news that Google is already working on editing, and not just viewing, Microsoft Office documents in Chrome OS is very interesting because of the potential. Maybe by the end of year, the functionality will make it into the Chrome browser, too."

45 of 72 comments (clear)

  1. Google going for the jugular! by kawabago · · Score: 2

    Google is striking at Microsoft's heart. About time.

    1. Re:Google going for the jugular! by bogaboga · · Score: 1

      Not so fast! All MS has to do is to tweak Google's targeted file formats. It's worked in the past... don't see why it won't work yet again.

    2. Re:Google going for the jugular! by stephanruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't understand. What does this do that Google Docs/Drive doesn't already do?

      Will this get us pixel-perfect wysiwyg editing of Microsoft Documents?

      Somehow, I doubt it. Google Docs/Drive doesn't even get that right for PDF documents. I doubt it will get that right for Microsoft Word Documents, which by design are much much worst than PDF documents.

    3. Re:Google going for the jugular! by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      It's interesting if it's part of Chromium since that would mean it's open source. Google Docs is unfortunately proprietary, so it's kind of useless if you want to use free software.

    4. Re:Google going for the jugular! by Knuckles · · Score: 3, Insightful

      http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-376.htm

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    5. Re:Google going for the jugular! by Knuckles · · Score: 2

      That doesn't mean anything, Microsoft is not compliant with the standard.

      I'm not kidding, MS dumped a bunch of lame "documentation" on the comitteee then when the committee tried to tidy up some of the incredible amounts of stupidity in it, MS just ignored them. MS has the most compliant implementation, but no full implementation exists.

      I know all that, but that does not change the fact that they can't change important parts of the specs willy-nilly, like the guy I replied to suggested.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    6. Re:Google going for the jugular! by zmahk31 · · Score: 1

      If Google gets this onto enough devices, then little by little they will dictate the de-facto standard for OOXML, i.e., how it's "really" supposed to work and render beyond the ECMA paperwork, and Microsoft will have to make sure that their programs will be Google compatible. Google might just have enough market share to fully commoditize word processors and spread sheets, something that OO/LO started but did not get beyond the tipping point.

    7. Re:Google going for the jugular! by transporter_ii · · Score: 1

      Or adding bloat. Good grief, I want a web browser to be a web browser. This is why we can't have nice things. Because as soon as someone gets a great product, they have to keep screwing with it until they ruin it...FIREFOX...GNOME.

      How about using the right tool for the right job??? Imagine that. A web browser to browse with, and a bloated office product to edit bloated office files.

      --
      Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
    8. Re:Google going for the jugular! by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Will this get us pixel-perfect wysiwyg editing of Microsoft Documents?

      Probably not; heck, even Microsoft Office isn't pixel-perfect wysiwig.

      OTOH, QuickOffice, which is what Google is porting to NaCl to do this, is a higher-fidelity editor for the Microsoft Office formats than import-to-Docs, edit, export-as-Office.

    9. Re:Google going for the jugular! by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't understand. What does this do that Google Docs/Drive doesn't already do?

      Will this get us pixel-perfect wysiwyg editing of Microsoft Documents?

      Somehow, I doubt it. Google Docs/Drive doesn't even get that right for PDF documents. I doubt it will get that right for Microsoft Word Documents, which by design are much much worst than PDF documents.

      This is Google. They like to make redundant products where they'll get the main concept right but half a half-assed implementation which gets improved for a few iterations before it's abandoned and eventually taken off the market for a somewhat inferior alternative with more social networking features and less core functionality.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    10. Re:Google going for the jugular! by Lennie · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought too, but I don't see it in the Chromium code base.

      The change that is refered to in the article is just enabling the use of the application. Which might mean probably it's just available in ChromeOS (and later in Chrome).

      Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong place...

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    11. Re:Google going for the jugular! by flyingfsck · · Score: 2

      However, MS can and do, willy nilly ignore any part of the spec they want to.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    12. Re:Google going for the jugular! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      DoSpacingLikeWord95

      How does that work again?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    13. Re:Google going for the jugular! by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      Yeah let's replace one monopolistic pawn of the government for another. I'm sure that will end well.

  2. Not just for the web anymore by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Seems google is inventing Gemacs?

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    1. Re:Not just for the web anymore by ThorGod · · Score: 1

      Can't wait for the yVi release

      --
      PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    2. Re:Not just for the web anymore by arielCo · · Score: 2

      Umm, you're aware this is about Chrome OS the operating system, not the web browser, right? TFT.

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
    3. Re:Not just for the web anymore by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Umm, you're aware this is about Chrome OS the operating system, not the web browser, right?

      Actually, its about a Native Client extension for the Chrome browser that is currently only available for (and bundled with) the dev channel of Chrome OS.

  3. Even better: Change MS Office's default format by bogaboga · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If I were Google, I'd bankroll efforts to develop software that would change MS office's default file formats to "something sensible", in addition to championing efforts to have this capability enabled in every office installation. That would surely produce interesting responses.

    1. Re: Even better: Change MS Office's default format by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What is more sensible than the MS Office Open XML standard (ISO/IEC 29500)?

      An open format.

      Office Open XML is an XML mapping of the Microsoft Office binary format. It's less open than a Pyongyang bank on beloved leader's birthday.

    2. Re: Even better: Change MS Office's default format by blarkon · · Score: 2

      Google would clearly prefer to drop billions into stuff like balloon internet as opposed to fighting the endless war on Microsoft Office.

    3. Re: Even better: Change MS Office's default format by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > It's less open than a Pyongyang bank on beloved leader's birthday.

      Oh yeah, it's sooooo closed that "SoftMaker Office 2010 is able to read and write .DOCX and .XLSX files in its word processor and spreadsheet applications. LibreOffice supports reading and writing Office Open XML files. OpenOffice.org from version 3.0 has been able to import Office Open XML files. Version 3.2 improves this feature with read support even for password-protected Office Open XML files. The Go-oo fork of OpenOffice.org could also write OOXML files. KOffice version 2.2 and later was able to import Office Open XML files. Other office products that offer import support for the Office Open XML formats include TextEdit (included with Mac OS X), iWork, IBM Lotus Notes, Abiword, WordPerfect, Kingsoft Office and Google Docs." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_29500

      Care to try again?

    4. Re: Even better: Change MS Office's default format by theskipper · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      It would have taken less time to understand the ac's point than to type all that drivel. Mavis Beacon would be proud though.

    5. Re: Even better: Change MS Office's default format by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      If you read the ISO spec, you'd realize it's not really open (it makes references to MSO's former binary format, which isn't open).

      Also, MS's implementation diverges from the ISO specs (not sure about 2013, though. I didn't even know 2013 was out).

    6. Re: Even better: Change MS Office's default format by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      If I were Google, I'd bankroll efforts to develop software that would change MS office's default file formats to "something sensible", in addition to championing efforts to have this capability enabled in every office installation. That would surely produce interesting responses.

      Google would clearly prefer to drop billions into stuff like balloon internet as opposed to fighting the endless war on Microsoft Office.

      And why would Google do this?

      Balloon internet means millions of people get Internet access. These people are essentially blank slates to imprint the Google brand to, and millions of new potential ad-viewers with whom Google can make money from.

      Microsoft Office users? They already for the most part use Google. There's no extra money to be had making office formats "sane".

      Unless you can convince people that sane office formats will let Google sell more ads, they won't bother. Perhaps if the sane office format showed Google ads every time you opened them?

  4. Re:Editing... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    Does not mean creating

    In this case, it's actually supposed to mean precisely that.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  5. Can it read mail yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail.
    -- Jamie Zawinski

    1. Re:Can it read mail yet? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

      And by definition, operating systems cannot include applications.

      That's a very odd definition. Given that basically every OS ever sold has included applications.

      Google needs to prepare for its next anti-monopoly trial if it is going to start bundling app-like functionality in its OS.

      Every OS has always included bundled apps. That's not an anti-monopoly problem.

      It is an antimonopoly problem if you engage in unfair competition by bundling apps for which there is an existing competitive market with a monopoly OS as the centerpiece of a broader pattern of anticompetitive practices (e.g., prohibiting resellers from including competing apps or removing the bundled app, etc.) designed to extend to the OS monopoly into the market that the bundled app is in.

      People who don't really understand what happened in the Microsoft-bundling-IE cases often generalize incorrectly from their misunderstanding of the issues in that case.

  6. Re:Editing... by kthreadd · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure but the article talks about QuickOffice, which like Google Docs is a proprietary product.

  7. Re:Editing... by gl4ss · · Score: 2

    Yes, but QuickOffice only works with Microsoft Office documents, a format Google doesn't own. Do you think they would rather see people using QuickOffice to make Microsoft Office documents, or Google Docs to make Google Docs? QuickOffice is just there to provide the support that is neccessary by today's standards, but probably nothing more.

    I think it should be mentioned that google picked up quickoffice recently(after quickoffice lost it's big license deals), so they own it.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  8. Re:Yay.. more bloat ! by r1348 · · Score: 2, Informative

    We're talking of Chrome OS here, it's the operative system of the Chromebooks.

  9. One more nail to MS' by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    coffin

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:One more nail to MS' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You seem eager to replace your old master by your new master. Why?

    2. Re:One more nail to MS' by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Which this seems to be non of them.

      This particular solution isn't an open format and the implementation doesn't seem to be open source software as far as I can see.

      Maybe eventually it will be.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
  10. Re:Editing... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Yeah, and editing doesn't mean saving, right? Maybe that's going to be added in some future version, as they haven't specifically mentioned it here.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  11. Re:Yay.. more bloat ! by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2

    Well, if people want it, then they can use it. However, though TFS says "Maybe by the end of year, the functionality will make it into the Chrome browser, too", I really hope it doesn't.

    I'm one of those people who are a bit ambivalent about our preferred browsers; I was a late-ish adopter of Chrome (and Chromium) after Firefox, and occasionally I swap back and forth. Currently I'm back with Firefox on my computer, and Chrome on my phone. But if the Chrome browser gets padded out with a WP/spreadsheet package, it's very unlikely that I'll ever use it again.

  12. Eggs, too, as in eggzadurate. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1, Funny

    Excel editing! This is impressive -- I created a spreadsheet in Excel of my shopping list (hot dogs, buns, tp) yesterday and when I saved it it was over 2 gigabytes. If Chrome can handle that, wow!

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:Eggs, too, as in eggzadurate. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      For the clueless, certain global cell format changes force Excel to instantiate all the virtual cells way off to the ends of the Earth, resulting in hundred+ MB saves.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  13. Re:Yay.. more bloat ! by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

    TFA mentions a previously released office document viewer extension for Chrome, so presumably if/when the office editor will also be provided as a Chrome extension rather than integrated.

  14. Re:Yay.. more bloat ! by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

    Well, if people want it, then they can use it. However, though TFS says "Maybe by the end of year, the functionality will make it into the Chrome browser, too", I really hope it doesn't.

    Its worth noting that the new editor is, like the existing Chrome Office Viewer, a Native Client app resulting from porting QuickOffice that is installed-by-default on the supported builds of Chrome OS. I would suspect that, if it "makes it into Chrome browser", it will do so as an app on the Chrome Web Store that Chrome browser users can choose to install or not, as they see fit.

  15. Re:Yay.. more bloat ! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    But if the Chrome browser gets padded out with a WP/spreadsheet package, it's very unlikely that I'll ever use it again.

    If you open it in a new window, you can pretend they are separate products.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  16. Re:Editing... by jon3k · · Score: 1

    That should be easy enough to fix, you just need a blank word and excel document you can make copies of.

  17. Re:Yay.. more bloat ! by hobarrera · · Score: 1

    Uhm...

    Maybe by the end of year, the functionality will make it into the Chrome browser, too."

  18. Re:Different header on page 1, or no go! by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    Save it as two documents.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  19. Common misconception by snadrus · · Score: 1

    Only the download size is getting "padded" & that's automatic in the background. Unless you request the editor, that DLL, it won't load. Ram & Start-up should be unaffected.

    --
    Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.