Office/Productivity Applications: From the Desktop to the Cloud?

This is so funny to hear the term "Cloud Computing, Cloud Applications". This has had many names over the years and Cloud Computing is just the latest hype. It reminds me of the MainFrame era whereby applications AND data were remotely stored and users used what was called dumb terminals at the time. Fast forward to 2010, we are now entering this NEW/OLD age computing model where applications and possibly the data would be remotely controlled. The difference of yesteryear and today is that in the past mainframes and users were mostly over private lines where the cloud computing model will be over a vulnerable Internet model and we all know there are all types of threats lurking over this medium.
Data and access security will be the biggest issues with the cloud computing model. I'm not sure this is going to see a solution anytime soon due to terms of service and who is going to be responsible for any security breach.
My opinion is this has a lot of runway before any take off for cloud computing, but there sure seems to be a lot of hype going on for something that has not even lifted off.

I think the most important thing that CIOs (and CEOs) can do is to find a way to establish a baseline for their organizations. The management team needs to determine what the corporation needs to accomplish, the organizations present state, and the desired state to accomplish the business goals. New technology is not a requirement for this effort. Here are my thoughts on the question of Office 2010 and its business impact.

First, few organizations have clear requirements for an upgrade to Office 2010. Most organizations do not need to purchase any additional software for the next five years – even if the software is free. Free software requires the same level of effort to implement as purchased software and most organizations do not have the leadership in place to make a move to Google Apps or any other free software. While the corporation has no ties to Microsoft, I believe more than sixty percent of the employees continue to use Microsoft Word and Excel to complete their work. I believe if one looks closely at the DC Government, users of Google Apps, that one would find this to be true. Microsoft “stuff” comes “free of charge” with much of the hardware the corporations purchase. It costs more and requires more time to purchase a system without the Microsoft “sutff” preinstalled.

Here is the way I see it. The advantage of a free version of Microsoft office is the ability to use multiple systems and only purchase a single copy of Microsoft Office 2010. This way, the corporate copy runs on the corporate system and the home user, who uses Microsoft Office 2003, can use the free (web) version to convert or publish work from the home system to the latest version of Microsoft. If this user is part of a large organization, then Office 2010 comes preinstalled on the corporate laptop so no need to consider the free web version. The other scenario is that some CIO/CEO team decides that Microsoft Office 2010 is just too expensive and chooses Google apps – a mistake right out of the gate – then the corporate user can use the free version of Microsoft 2010 to create documents and move these docs to Google Apps (these documents originally created in Microsoft Office 2003). I still see no reason in this scenario to use the free version of Microsoft 2010 since the user could just as easily move the Office 2003 document directly to Google Apps.

Finally, I see no reason to bother with the integration, management and security of the free versions. If you need Office 2010 – buy it. If you choose to go the free route, become a leader, part the seas, and lead your organization to a new world that relies on connectivity to the internet for business success. Can we do this? I do not think so. We have more software than we use already!

Michael, This is a great question and one I have been grappling with myself. I already use Google docs to collaborate with remote associates, and have also used it as a repository for some common, non-proprietary documents that I would like folks to have access to. While the tool is meeting the basic need in its free ($0) state, it is not without challenges. For example, document organization is a conscious effort, and my model has been to use a master account and then dole out access as needed to other Google accounts. This is a process that requires thought and preparation for each new document created. My bottom line is that they are not yet ready for corporate adoption on a mass scale, but can fulfill some needs if used properly.

Security – difficult to know what the real security level is here, because I have no concept of how or where this data is stored. That said, I expect security to be high on the priority list of Google, MS and others as they develop the tools. Some form of acceptable certification of the security level will be required before heavily regulated groups (medical, legal, financial, etc.) can use it, and for most corporations to consider any kind of scale in its use.

Capability – I believe the tools [Google at least] support 90% of the features that 90% of users need. If you look at the “big” apps today, they have capabilities that even true power users have not tapped. Heck, I dare say many people still use [Enter] [Enter] [Enter] to force a page break. But if you’re a power spreadsheet user or writing a paper using advanced footnoting and ToC features, don’t look here.

Accessibility – we are getting more and more connected, but still, in many cases, offline access requires some sort of app. I have used Google offline a bit, and it has been touch and go; again it takes some awareness to know your current environment and how to use the tool. If you have good Internet access all or most of the time, it’s great, otherwise it becomes frustrating because the user experience is not always consistent.

We are a small office, and I am watching this space very closely, including Google corporate edition and MS on demand. However, we already have an investment in place for Office, Exchange and other sharing tools, couple with a need for advanced spreadsheet functions, so until those needs can be met and I can justify a full switch I can’t support a full migration.

Michael, in my fairly long experience, what will happen here is a gradual shift until a new balance is established between traditional solutions and the new ones. It is always like this, as decision makers get used to the new concepts, users decide what best fits them and, last but not least, the new product comes of age (thereby negating the drawback of lesser functionality).

The desktop solution will stay around for a very long time yet (I'm willing to bet there are still people using WP 5.1), the first Fortune 500 company will announce switching over before Q4 2010 (possibly prompted by a huge discount for marketing reasons by one of the suppliers) and small to middle sized businesses will likely all shift over in the years to come.

However, one aspect was not yet mentioned and that is the problem of existing documents, templates, forms, house-styles, printing requirements and so on. No company will make the effort to move all that onto a new platform just because it is new.

So, until the old stuff starts falling apart, online office applications will be "greenfield", new users, new projects, startups and the like. And will be competing with OpenOffice (with a massive head-start) and each other for this small market of new business.

Another aspect I did not see mentioned yet is SHARING. Google Documents has impressed me with it's ability to use the same spreadsheet with multiple people at the same time, anywhere in the world. I do not know if Microsoft's product will support the same option, it seems unlikely to me that it will. And this functionality, if you need it, is certain to attract a lot of users, old ones and new ones alike. Shared spreadsheets can replace traditional small web applications (for instance, a small firms inventory and sales information could be kept in a few shared spreadsheets rather than building/buying a web applications for it ... no web server, no database and no artificial limits on what information you can enter, just a browser ...).

So, in conclusion, no "big bang", a lot of infighting for what customers there will be and a possible new "Killer app" (with new killing results if misused!).

As an SMB business owner, I do think the price is right, but do not see the value for my organization. I'm often working disconnected, either while travelling or on site with a client, so it would be impractical to use something that doesn't give me constant connection to my basic tools. I budget for the Microsoft Office tools, but do look occasionally at Open Source options. If I do eventually move to a free tool, it will most likely be either Lotus Symphony or Open Office. At this point, I do not have a need for the collaboration capabilities of the on-line tools, as my employees and I work on separate projects. Where we need to share files, we either use the file server, a database or email the occasional file if someone is working remotely.

I use Outlook, Lotus Notes and Exchange Web Access and find the most frustrating one to use is Exchange Web Access...mainly because it looks like Outlook but behaves like a web app, so switching to a web app for the majority of my work would drive me crazy.

At this point, any of my clients who are looking to reduce costs are looking to modify the license types they are using or switching to open source rather than web applications.