[odf-discuss] News on MS pluggin

[marbux]

On 10/16/06, Ian Lynch <ian.lynch at zmsl.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2006-10-15 at 18:29 -0700, marbux wrote:
>
> > I'm not far enough along with OOo to pronounce on the comparison. But
> > it would have to be pretty bad to exceed Word's bugginess. My big
> > regret with OOo so far is that its designers tried to mimic the market
> > leader rather than building the proverbial better mousetrap.
> > It would really be fun to work on an open source word processor that
> > is designed to fulfill user needs rather than to replicate the
> > Microsoft Word experience.
>
> Kword? AbiWord? The thing about OOo is that a) the code is developed on
> mono which makes it monolithic and that is not at all easy to change. b)
> The take up of OOo compared to other FOSS WPs seems to indicate that
> having something familiar to users is important at least to initiate
> change.


Kword and AbiWord have some good things going for them. But I suspect that
if one were to start from scratch to build the better mousetrap, a lot of
the functionality would be located on the server side. The client-based word
processor is really more an incident related to its evolution in a time when
networks were the exception rather than the rule than it is to current and
foreseeable needs. The sneaker net was the lowest common denominator in the
market, so we got client-side word processors. No one was really looking at
a future where networked relational databases would be ubiquitous. The IBM
Correcting Selectric typewriter was the big competitor.

Increasingly, developers are recognizing that there is tremendous customer
value in collaborative environments located on the server side.  Business is
booming in web apps. And what IBM is doing with its Workplace architecture
is really worth watching.

> Personally, I believe the days of the giant office suites are
> > numbered.
>
> Possibly, but its going to take time. There are several steps needed.
> Show the Emperor has no clothes and alternatives are perfectly viable
> (OOo). Provided reliable interoperability (ODF) Provide the diversity to
> give choice. In the latter stakes web based applications like Google
> Office will play a big part simply because they are easy to get in front
> of people.


I see the era of big office suites dying from a thousand cuts rather than
from one big wound. We're well down the path already. People are spending
more and more time in their web browsers and email clients  and less and
less time in their office suites. I see that trend accelerating as more web
apps become available directly geared to vertical markets. It's only a gut
feeling, but I expect to see real growth in rich server-side apps with rich
clients, trailing the market successes in HTML- and browser-based web apps.
I think that's the point where ODF really blossoms.


An Office redesign from scratch would a) be expensive to do, b) signal
> that new approaches were OK c) Compete with their own cash cow. So
> whatever the logic its very difficult for MS to even contemplate it
> purely from a marketing pov.


Perhaps, but they have to be aware that they have not managed to monopolize
the real innovations in word processing. E.g., they've lost the plain text
editing market to a host of specialized apps and ditto for the website
editor market, blogs, forums, wikis, on and on. The traditional word
processor is less and less at the center of things officeish, being
increasingly marginalized by more specialized tools, e.g., server-side
relational databases and web apps that rely on them and special-purpose,
cross-platform, client-side apps.

I guess the point I was trying to make is that Microsoft is aware of where
at least most of the action really is and has chosen not to take  Word,
Excel, and PowerPoint there, albeit that the company is belatedly creating
an online Office product that has but a glimmer of the namesake's
capabilities. Time will tell, but I think Microsoft reads the tea leaves
well enough to realize that the big client-side office suite is not going to
be profitable much longer. It's being commoditized and marginalized.

The timeline is much harder for me to read. 'Tis a time of great flux.

Best regards,

Marbux
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20061016/ff527fd8/attachment-0002.htm