Forum Moderators: goodroi
Sun Microsystems and Google plan to announce a collaborative effort that some analysts speculate could elevate the profile of the OpenOffice.org...Details won't emerge publicly until Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Sun CEO Scott McNealy take the stage on Tuesday at a news conference in Mountain View, Calif. But one strong possibility is a partnership that could help shift personal computing out of Microsoft's domain and into Google's.
A move to distribute and popularize OpenOffice or StarOffice would be a challenge to Microsoft's money maker, Office, which could significantly weaken it's revenue stream.
Sun's president posted this to his blog [blogs.sun.com] on Sunday:
But value is returning to the desktop applications, and not simply through Windows Vista... From the obvious, to music sharing clients and development tools, there's a resurgence of interest in resident software that executes on your desktop, yet connects to network services. Without a browser. Like Skype. Or QNext. Or Google Earth. And Java? OpenOffice and StarOffice?If I were a betting man, I'd bet the world was about to change.
As an aside, I'm not sure about that Sun bloke though. He seems on cloud cookoo land to me. 20 floppy disks? Even Windows only came with 14 if I remember, though I don't know anyone taht didn't opt for the CD-ROM version ;-) And who goes to yahoo.com for software at the moment? We services are still something of a plaything, I can't imagine anyone using Yahoo! Mail for any serious use.
However it's early days yet and the potential for a computing revolution is certainly there. It's just going to take some bright ideas, smart programmers, and plenty of capital to back it up. Now can anyone name a company that has all three? ;-)
IMO a lot of Microssoft's critics are there because of their Monopoly over computing habits today - which is exactly why quite a few are revelling in their search not gallopping up behind Google and Yahoo.
Where Google are the current leaders in Search (despite seeming to be making more and more errors with 301, sandboxing and overall quality), surely adding more and more products that tie in users is exactly the problem with Microsoft?
I for one will never go with companies that try to bully there way to your £ (or $ then) - for a start they become incredibly arrogant to the point of thinking they are omnipotent (Take Tesco in UK retail and their recent stealth increases in insurance and financial products to make them far from good value!).
I bet Sun are keen to go with this - check out their 2yr financials - harldy something to shout about :¦
So an interesting one, but for now I am not convinced and will stay with MS Office. I am sure I will not be the only one.
the end users (staff) may not feel comfortable with the new software - they will want retraining - the costs involved could be a major deterrent for many businesses
disagree? well, *nix PCs with office software have been around for a long time ....... but they haven't really dented microsoft's profit line yet .......
disagree? well, *nix PCs with office software have been around for a long time ....... but they haven't really dented microsoft's profit line yet .......
OpenOffice runs perfectly on Windows based machines as well, you don't need to switch OS to use it.
d
maintaining MSOffice costs us a fortune
> OpenOffice runs perfectly on Windows based
Ya, it works excellent here. We find the word processor actuall works with more formats than anything else out there. We also like the print to PDF option. It easily replaces office.
Be sure to check out the NEW Release 2.0 candidate - it addresses every single NIT I had with v1.
[openoffice.org...]
Also microsoft office is the programing I have always used and, which my university expects me to use and teaches me how to use.
Furthermore Microsoft Office 2003 costs 26 euros for students.
Eventhough I like google I don't have much hope for open office.
Mostly I use Calc (equivalent of Excel) and Writer (equivalent of Word).
Never had a problem with either.
Licensing Microsoft Office in a Windows Terminal Server Environment [microsoft.com]
Microsoft licenses its desktop application products on a per-computer basis. ... Therefore, in a terminal server environment, you must acquire a license for all devices that will be running a Microsoft software application product (for example, Office) from the terminal server.
[Emphasis added]
We're a small business, also, and I doubt that we could successfully pass MS Office costs to our customers, and I know we can't absorb those costs. OpenOffice may have its warts, but it's effective enough to do what we need.
>> Microsoft Office 2003 costs 26 euros for students
That's fine if you're going to be a student for the rest of your life, but it won't keep a disgruntled employee from reporting your business to Microsoft for unlicensed or inappropriately licensed software.
As Google's growing ISP plans dovetail with these office suite plans we could see major changes happen fast in favor of Google control of the desktop environment.
It's clear that weakening Microsoft has been an important goal of Sun's for many years, although they've yet to really get anywhere with it.
I wonder what advantage google sees in expending energy in an attempt to weaken Microsoft Office's dominance with an open source free product?
The more you can get Joe Public to realize that you really don't have to use Microsoft for office applications, the easier time you'll have convincing those same people that you really don't need Microsoft as an OS.
I wonder what the total current upgrade cost is for someone who got into Office at the beginning and has gone through the 7 or 8 editions. That's a very significant revenue stream -- without much downside -- that's at risk for MS.
<aside>The only thing I can find on number of floppies is Office 8 (beginning of '97). It took 45 of those little suckers just for Word, Excel and PowerPoint.</aside>
The more you can get Joe Public to realize that you really don't have to use Microsoft for office applications, the easier time you'll have convincing those same people that you really don't need Microsoft as an OS.
That makes sense from Sun's perspective, but I don't see how this does much for google.
One problem I see is that users will need to re-trained to use the new applications. Say you have an office with 30 employees all getting along with MS office. Would the cost of training the users how to get the most from the new software not actualy cost more than the MS liscence fee?
Opensource is great, but there are always costs.
From a personal user point of view, it may be a lot simpler. OO=free MS office=$$
This one will definatly be interesting. Microsoft and Google are heading for a showdown. MS are goign for what has always been Googles cash stream (search) Google on the otherhand seam to be heading deep into MS territorw with Desktop applications.
The grass is always greener on the other side.
Mack.
>> Microsoft Office 2003 costs 26 euros for studentsThat's fine if you're going to be a student for the rest of your life, but it won't keep a disgruntled employee from reporting your business to Microsoft for unlicensed or inappropriately licensed software.
I was thinking about downloading OpenOffice to use on my home computer, as I've never been a big MS fan. But I have more difficulty trusting google than I do MS, so I doubt if I'll be doing that now. If I do any university-related work on my home computer (which, of course, I do), I can pick up a CD of MSOffice at the reference desk to take home and load onto my home computer -- all part of the licensing agreement.
IT admins everywhere with a few shiny new "Google 2U OS" boxes on the network serving up core desktop office apps to the entire office of several thousand people will surely be jumping for joy in 5-10 years
Will the google version be phoning home as you compose things and flash ads at you?
I like that they are promoting Open Source stuff but why would I use the G version versus something else?
If the top end version of Vista comes with the Office suit built in then why would a user want to change.
Another thing MS have done over the past few years is strike up deals with lots of major manufacturers whereby they ship Office with their systems. MS Works for example ships with quite a lot of new systems. I know it isn't as good as the full blown MS office suit, but for a personal user it will do.
Many PC companies also ship Office as an optional extra. It has to be really worth it for the manufacturer to ship free software, The markup these companies make from shipping Office has to be quite an incentive.
Mack.
If you look at the annual cost of MSOffice per employee, I doubt that any business would get really excited about a lower cost alternative UNLESS it offered lower support costs or better functionality. Face it, if you are paying an employee tens of thousands of dollars to work for you, what's a couple of hundred to keep them productive? One additional visit per year by a support tech would wipe out any potential savings from "free" software.
"Better" is the only way to win that contest, and due to the pain of changing software, "much better" is probably the only thing that would work.
Really, though, we'll have to see the specifics of the announcement before debating the viability of any possible products...
