5 ms·

Google Launches A Major Offensive Against Microsoft With “Going Google”

34 points by vaksel 17y ago

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
GavinB 17y ago
Moving to Google Docs would be a big step backwards in functionality. Word + Dropbox is perfect because it combines cloud availability with native capability. If you want me to switch, you need to offer something better. The ability to handle the organization of large documents would be a great start. I'd love something with the features of http://www.bartastechnologies.com/products/copywrite/ http://www.bartastechnologies.com/products/copywrite/ would be awesome. CopyWrite is only for Mac and I don't want to switch OSes just for a word processor . . .
- quizbiz 17y ago
  Google Docs would definitely be more trusted if it worked a bit more like dropbox. Special folder where docs were automatically synced to. Browser + Finder = redundancy and assurance.
  - weaksauce 17y ago
    Few things work as well as dropbox in my opinion. Though the newest word for the mac with the publishing layout changed my mind about microsoft a bit.
  - litewulf 17y ago
    I remember seeing a google docs python backup tool. I think it'd be pretty awesome if there was some sort of two-way bridge for this sort of thing. (Hm. Let me go check out that google docs api...)
- riffic 17y ago
  Google Docs offers collaboration and revision control. native capability isn't much of a "feature" these days imo
  - GavinB 17y ago
    I suspect that we just have different needs, and that's fine. I use google docs for quick access to simple documents, and it works very well for that. I'm just disturbed by the trend to less feature-rich word processors, when I would like a program with greater power and features for serious writing.
mullr 17y ago
"Go Google"? Checklist of features? Really? This smells like a bad IT magazine ad. It lacks the class I expect from them.
- bigbang 17y ago
  Sings of Google becoming more like Microsoft.
- omouse 17y ago
  So? Programmers aren't the target market, regular office workers who use MS Office are the targets. It's easier to sell a manager on the idea of using Google Docs when you have a list of features rather than just a brand-name. "Go Google" is a good slogan I think, and the list of features will start to become associated with it. People still think that Google is a search engine company. I think they're trying to re-brand themselves, at least for one target market.
- lunchbox 17y ago
  I'm trying to understand why this bothers you. Are they not supposed to talk about their features?
  - mullr 17y ago
    It bothers me because of the associations it brings to mind. This style of advertising is indicative of the kind of product development that google is supposed to stand against. When I see such an ad, my first reaction is to think "if you have to advertise like this..." Of course there are all kinds of good reasons and places to talk about features. This way of doing it just feels tacky.
mikedouglas 17y ago
Paper, billboards, and blimps? At least they didn't waste any money on AdWords.
- quizbiz 17y ago
  And I don't think it even nearly qualifies for the title, "a major offensive".
- yef 17y ago
  Actually, they both spend money on AdWords: http://www.google.com/search?q=word+processor http://www.google.com/search?q=word+processor
  - yef 17y ago
    Why the downvote, if I may ask?
smithjchris 17y ago
Google Apps doesn't cut it for more than a casual business user. The spreadsheet is hideously slow and doesn't integrate with the real data sources that organisations use, there is no equation editor for docs (a big risk if you ask me when someone technical comes along) and due to the "cloud" nature, it doesn't deal with the legal and confidentiality requirements of most businesses. It's also lacking in OOB solutions like invoices, purchase orders and reasonable looking templates etc. Word 2007, Excel 2007 and TortoiseSVN (which has the ability to merge excel and word docs) any day. If you're cheaping out, OpenOffice is still much better. Google Apps is a step backwards indeed.
- mechanical_fish 17y ago
  In my business, the sharing feature of Google Apps trumps all of the missing features that you mention. It does mean that the use cases for Google Apps are all subtly different from their Office counterparts. Yes, the spreadsheet isn't for classic spreadsheet applications (like financial projections or heavy-duty number crunching); it's better suited as a kind of HTML table display that's easy to update and can do simple sums. The word processor is like a very fancy WYSIWYG HTML editor -- but, in a world where almost nothing that I type is destined for print, that feels quite appropriate to me. Very few people in my company generate invoices or POs. When I did so as a freelancer I used special-purpose web apps. There are also special-purpose equation editors (Mathtype) for the two people in your organization who actually use them on a regular basis. (I used them far more in school than I ever did in real life. I managed to work half a decade as a research physicist without touching one more than twice. Sheets of paper are a marvelous invention. ;)
  - smithjchris 17y ago
    Err, we just use TortoiseSVN for document management. The documents go in with the source code. You can merge stuff, have multiple authors working on the same document, get a full revision history and do all that other junk that Google docs does. Plus it's in house, works over the web (over https) and can safely be delivered over our VPN solution without having to rely on a 3rd party like Google for security, storage and availability. There is a LOT of benefit in being able to wake up our sysadmin and fix something that is down rather than wait on Google to do it. Word costs us virtually nothing thanks to MAPS[1] from microsoft which gives us 10x Vista, 10x Office for $350 the lot (for internal use) and a couple of copies of windows 2008 server and an exchange license. There's no point in fishing out $100 for mathtype - Word 2007 is very close now. [1] https://partner.microsoft.com/40016455 https://partner.microsoft.com/40016455
torpor 17y ago
One thing Microsoft has that Google doesn't: the ability to keep working even when the 'net goes down. People who think the 'net doesn't go down: haven't used it long enough, in a production environment.
- riffic 17y ago
  not true, google docs has offline capability via Gears. and html5 "fixes" this as well http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/ http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/
  - torpor 17y ago
    Ah, well I was not aware of this - you learn something new every day. Glad you explained this to me, because it seems that its a common perception, even if its not true, that Google apps need a 'net connection. I will now investigate the truth (got no use for Google Docs or MS Word, personally) and attempt to correct it when I hear that line again ..

34 points by vaksel 17y ago

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

Moving to Google Docs would be a big step backwards in functionality. Word + Dropbox is perfect because it combines cloud availability with native capability. If you want me to switch, you need to offer something better. The ability to handle the organization of large documents would be a great start. I'd love something with the features of http://www.bartastechnologies.com/products/copywrite/ http://www.bartastechnologies.com/products/copywrite/ would be awesome. CopyWrite is only for Mac and I don't want to switch OSes just for a word processor . . .

quizbiz 17y ago
Google Docs would definitely be more trusted if it worked a bit more like dropbox. Special folder where docs were automatically synced to. Browser + Finder = redundancy and assurance.
- weaksauce 17y ago
  Few things work as well as dropbox in my opinion. Though the newest word for the mac with the publishing layout changed my mind about microsoft a bit.
- litewulf 17y ago
  I remember seeing a google docs python backup tool. I think it'd be pretty awesome if there was some sort of two-way bridge for this sort of thing. (Hm. Let me go check out that google docs api...)
riffic 17y ago
Google Docs offers collaboration and revision control. native capability isn't much of a "feature" these days imo
- GavinB 17y ago
  I suspect that we just have different needs, and that's fine. I use google docs for quick access to simple documents, and it works very well for that. I'm just disturbed by the trend to less feature-rich word processors, when I would like a program with greater power and features for serious writing.

mullr 17y ago

"Go Google"? Checklist of features? Really? This smells like a bad IT magazine ad. It lacks the class I expect from them.

bigbang 17y ago
Sings of Google becoming more like Microsoft.
omouse 17y ago
So? Programmers aren't the target market, regular office workers who use MS Office are the targets. It's easier to sell a manager on the idea of using Google Docs when you have a list of features rather than just a brand-name. "Go Google" is a good slogan I think, and the list of features will start to become associated with it. People still think that Google is a search engine company. I think they're trying to re-brand themselves, at least for one target market.
lunchbox 17y ago
I'm trying to understand why this bothers you. Are they not supposed to talk about their features?
- mullr 17y ago
  It bothers me because of the associations it brings to mind. This style of advertising is indicative of the kind of product development that google is supposed to stand against. When I see such an ad, my first reaction is to think "if you have to advertise like this..." Of course there are all kinds of good reasons and places to talk about features. This way of doing it just feels tacky.

mikedouglas 17y ago

Paper, billboards, and blimps? At least they didn't waste any money on AdWords.

quizbiz 17y ago
And I don't think it even nearly qualifies for the title, "a major offensive".
yef 17y ago
Actually, they both spend money on AdWords: http://www.google.com/search?q=word+processor http://www.google.com/search?q=word+processor
- yef 17y ago
  Why the downvote, if I may ask?

smithjchris 17y ago

Google Apps doesn't cut it for more than a casual business user. The spreadsheet is hideously slow and doesn't integrate with the real data sources that organisations use, there is no equation editor for docs (a big risk if you ask me when someone technical comes along) and due to the "cloud" nature, it doesn't deal with the legal and confidentiality requirements of most businesses. It's also lacking in OOB solutions like invoices, purchase orders and reasonable looking templates etc. Word 2007, Excel 2007 and TortoiseSVN (which has the ability to merge excel and word docs) any day. If you're cheaping out, OpenOffice is still much better. Google Apps is a step backwards indeed.

mechanical_fish 17y ago
In my business, the sharing feature of Google Apps trumps all of the missing features that you mention. It does mean that the use cases for Google Apps are all subtly different from their Office counterparts. Yes, the spreadsheet isn't for classic spreadsheet applications (like financial projections or heavy-duty number crunching); it's better suited as a kind of HTML table display that's easy to update and can do simple sums. The word processor is like a very fancy WYSIWYG HTML editor -- but, in a world where almost nothing that I type is destined for print, that feels quite appropriate to me. Very few people in my company generate invoices or POs. When I did so as a freelancer I used special-purpose web apps. There are also special-purpose equation editors (Mathtype) for the two people in your organization who actually use them on a regular basis. (I used them far more in school than I ever did in real life. I managed to work half a decade as a research physicist without touching one more than twice. Sheets of paper are a marvelous invention. ;)
- smithjchris 17y ago
  Err, we just use TortoiseSVN for document management. The documents go in with the source code. You can merge stuff, have multiple authors working on the same document, get a full revision history and do all that other junk that Google docs does. Plus it's in house, works over the web (over https) and can safely be delivered over our VPN solution without having to rely on a 3rd party like Google for security, storage and availability. There is a LOT of benefit in being able to wake up our sysadmin and fix something that is down rather than wait on Google to do it. Word costs us virtually nothing thanks to MAPS[1] from microsoft which gives us 10x Vista, 10x Office for $350 the lot (for internal use) and a couple of copies of windows 2008 server and an exchange license. There's no point in fishing out $100 for mathtype - Word 2007 is very close now. [1] https://partner.microsoft.com/40016455 https://partner.microsoft.com/40016455

torpor 17y ago

One thing Microsoft has that Google doesn't: the ability to keep working even when the 'net goes down. People who think the 'net doesn't go down: haven't used it long enough, in a production environment.

riffic 17y ago
not true, google docs has offline capability via Gears. and html5 "fixes" this as well http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/ http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/
- torpor 17y ago
  Ah, well I was not aware of this - you learn something new every day. Glad you explained this to me, because it seems that its a common perception, even if its not true, that Google apps need a 'net connection. I will now investigate the truth (got no use for Google Docs or MS Word, personally) and attempt to correct it when I hear that line again ..