Up till now, Microsoft has been very quiet about the nascent Web Office threat from Google. But today, in response to the news that IT systems consultancy CapGemini has partnered with Google to sell Google Apps Premier Edition (GAPE) to enterprises, Microsoft issued an email listing 10 "top questions that enterprises should ask when considering the switch to GAPE." The questions read more like reasons why enterprises shouldn't choose Google Apps. This list was first published by Mary Jo Foley, who says it was an unsolicited email from a Microsoft "corporate spokesperson".
The 10 reasons make for fascinating reading - and show just how concerned Microsoft really is about not only Google Apps, but Web Office in general. Here is a copy of the email list:
‚Äú1. Google touts having enterprise level customers but how many ‚ÄúUSERS‚Ä? of their applications truly exist within the enterprise?
‚Äú2. Google has a history of releasing incomplete products, calling them beta software, and issuing updates on a ‚Äúknown only to Google‚Ä? schedule ‚Äì this flies in the face of what enterprises want and need in their technology partners ‚Äì what is Google doing that indicates they are in lock step with customer needs?
“3. Google touts the low cost of their apps –not only price but the absence of need for hardware, storage or maintenance for Google Apps. BUT if GAPE is indeed a complement to MSFT Office, the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain. Doesn’t this result in increased complexity and increased costs?
“4. Google’s primary focus is on ad funded search. Their enterprise focus and now apps exist on the very fringe and in combination with other fringe services only account for 1% of the company’s revenue. What happens if Google executes poorly? Do they shut down given it will them in a minimal and short term way? Should customers trust that this won’t happen?
“5. Google’s apps only work if an enterprise has no power users, employees are always online, enterprises haven’t built custom Office apps – doesn’t this equal a very small % of global information workers today? –On a feature comparison basis, it’s not surprising that Microsoft has a huge lead.
“6. Google apps don’t have essential document creation features like support for headers, footers, tables of content, footnotes, etc. Additionally, while customers can collaborate on basic docs without the above noted features, to collaborate on detailed docs, a company must implement a two part process – work together on the basic doc, save it to Word or Excel and then send via email for final edits. Yes they have a $50 price tag, but with the inefficiencies created by just this one cycle, how much do GAPE really cost – and can you afford the fidelity loss?
‚Äú7. Enterprise companies have to constantly think about government regulations and standards ‚Äì while Google can store a lot of data for enterprises on Google servers, there is no easy to use, automated way for enterprises to regularly delete data, issue a legal hold for specific docs or bring copies into the corp. What happens if a company needs to respond to government regulations bodies? Google touts 99.9% uptime for their apps but what few people realize that promise is for Gmail only. Equally alarming is the definition Google has for ‚Äúdowntime‚Ä? ‚Äì ten consecutive minutes of downtime. What happens if throughout the day Google is down 7 minutes each hour? What does 7 minutes each hour for a full work day that cost an enterprise?
‚Äú8. In the world of business, it is always on and always connected. As such, having access to technical support 24/7 is essential. If a company deploys Google Apps and there is a technical issue at 8pm PST, Sorry. Google‚Äôs tech support is open M-F 1AM-6PM PST ‚Äì are these the new hours of global business? And if a customer‚Äôs ‚Äúdesignated administrator‚Ä? is not available (a requirement) does business just stop?
“9. Google says that enterprise customers use only 10% of the features in today’s productivity applications which implies that EVERYONE needs the SAME 10% of the feature when in fact it is very clear that in each company there are specific roles people play that demands access to specific information – how does Google’s generic strategy address role specific needs?
“10. With Google apps in perpetual beta and Google controlling when and if they rollout specific features and functionality, customers have minimal if any control over the timing of product rollouts and features – how do 1) I know how to strategically plan and train and 2) get the features and functionality I have specifically requested? How much money does not knowing cost?
‚ÄúI invite you to speak with customers, partners and analysts who can validate Office‚Äôs business model.‚Ä?
There's no doubt these are compelling reasons why an enterprise should choose Microsoft Office over Google Apps, at this point. But it's noticeable that the list doesn't mention the word "collaboration", which is probably the key benefit of Google Apps compared to MS Office.
Nor does Microsoft adequately rebut that Google Apps will be a complement to Microsoft Office (as CapsGemini and Google claimed yesterday). Microsoft says in point 3 that "the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain." But that doesn't address the features that Google Apps offers and how it might complement an enterprise's office software set-up.
What do you make of Microsoft's response? It certainly brings up some valid criticisms of Google Apps and Web Office, but then Google isn't claiming their product is a replacement of MS Office. Their stance is that it's a complement - and so in that respect this list by a Microsoft spokesperson is probably an over-reaction. It looks like someone in Redmond hit the panic button a bit too early.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Microsoft Issues 10 Reasons Why Enterprises Shouldn't Use Google Apps.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1600
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting! Just yesterday I posted about ZOHO and their move in the small business marketplace and potential threat to Google. Google made a significant announcement today... Read More
Last weekend I went shopping for some new duds for the trip to SF next week and on the counter near the register was a sign that had some notes about offering the store credit card on every purchase and a list of "10 objection overcomers". Today Read More
We heard earlier today how Microsoft issued a 10-point list on why Google Apps isn't ready for the enterprise. Now Zimbra, an innovative Web Office startup focused on messaging and collaboration, has added to the anti-Google Apps chorus - specifically... Read More
• Newspapers, don't leave the Internet holdouts behind -- Ombudsmen hearing from more readers irritated with constant Web references in the print edition.• The Bandwidth Explosion Myth • Germany warns citizens to avoid using Wi-Fi -- Germans think... Read More
Microsoft responded to the announcement of CapGemini support for Google Apps yesterday with a statement and a list of questions about Google Apps for the Enterprise -- or reasons potentially not to use them. Mary Jo Foley at ZDNet has both, and the lis... Read More
Here is a summary of the week's Web Tech action on Read/WriteWeb. Note that you can subscribe to the Weekly Wrapups, either via the special RSS feed or by email. Web Products Google Apps Goes After Enterprise Market This week... Read More
Microsoft provided a list of 10 reasons not to use Google Apps. Can not agree to most of them, even for enterprise. But I have my very personal list of problems with Google Apps, although I think all of them... Read More
Enterprises continue to adopt web technologies and 'web 2.0' trends, but there are two common threads to this adoption. One is that web technologies are step-by-step being adopted by enterprises, but they aren't yet ready to usurp many desktop software... Read More
O título acima parece estranho, mas não é. Quantas vezes já não recebemos um documento que precisa ser editado por várias pessoas e nunca sabemos qual é a versão mais atual? Para quem não sabe como resolver esse problema, a resposta é bastant... Read More
Here is a summary of the week's Web Tech action on Read/WriteWeb. Note that you can subscribe to the Weekly Wrapups, either via the special RSS feed or by email. Web News Yahoo! Drops $350m on Zimbra; an Open Source,... Read More
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
Top reason not to use Outlook? Eventually it locks up, swallowing all your email and contacts. It's happened to me several times and happened to half a dozen people I know.
Posted by: ryan scott | September 10, 2007 3:29 PMAll those typos and odd capitalizations, syntaxes, etc. make this seem like it came from some angry middle-management trying to make a move for a promotion by proving he has strong persuasive writing skills.
This letter is presumptuous and disrespectful to Microsoft's (I assume) current customers.
Fear-mongering may work, but it's no way to treat businesses whose, er...business you want to keep from the ever-growing (and improving) competition.
Posted by: Kevin Keating | September 10, 2007 4:06 PMPoint #6 does touch on collaboration briefly:
Not too much though ;)
Posted by: Stephen Glauser | September 10, 2007 4:19 PMSome are valid criticisms, but most of it just seems whiny. And I think he misses the point entirely that Google is offering a complementary product and - more importantly - attempting to carve out a brand new market. #5 and #9 especially strike me as coming from the old office paradigm.
#4 seems a dangerous criticism for Microsoft to level... using that logic, I should trust any MS product except for Windows and Office.
Maybe instead of attacking Google, Microsoft should be working on their own solution for collaborative sharing and editing. Because until then, Google has a strong offering in an area that Microsoft has yet to touch.
Posted by: Eric | September 10, 2007 4:45 PMI think there are some truths to this rant...we have three solutions that address some of these concerns, all in java: ExtenXLS works with Excel but provides java functionality, Exteria creates data flows that can be used in excel, web services, or other Office apps, and Spreadsheet Server is a web spreadsheet that is controlled internally and can map data objects from a number of sources, then publish the spreadsheet as REST.
Posted by: Charles Keatts | September 10, 2007 4:46 PMWhen I read the header of the article I KNEW without reading it that the line "Microsoft panics" about Google Apps was somewhere in it. Of course, its in there!
Glad you didn't disappoint Read/Write.
Most of the points are valid, but if I would make fun of something. . itd be the fact they made a Top 10 list. How very Digg.com friendly of them.
Posted by: Brant Tedeschi | September 10, 2007 5:14 PMI think it was really nice of Microsoft to give Google a list of all the things Google needs to work on to appeal to the enterprise market. :)
Posted by: quick | September 10, 2007 5:14 PMWow, so let me get this straight... Did I really just read Microsoft stating that "Google has a history of releasing incomplete products". Someone call the Guinness Book of Records, for the previous holder of the most hypocritical statement ever issued has been left in Microsoft's dust.
Posted by: Daniel Gibbons | September 10, 2007 7:22 PM"But it's noticeable that the list doesn't mention the word "collaboration", which is probably the key benefit of Google Apps compared to MS Office."
"Additionally, while customers can collaborate on basic docs without the above noted features, to collaborate on detailed docs, a company must implement a two part process..."
You did read the email, right?
Posted by: anon | September 10, 2007 7:51 PMI don't see GOOG's apps having much collaboration advantage over Office. They're on the web, but MSFT has a ton of collaboration functionality built into their apps. At this point, their ubiquity puts them ahead of GOOG for collaboration on that basis alone.
The real advantage for GOOG and others like it lies ahead. They're not there yet, but moving the data off the desktop and into the web would allow Enterprise grade governance and security to be put in place for key spreadsheets and documents. The question is whether GOOG, which is much closer to the Social than the Business web, understands the issues properly to do it justice.
See my post for more:
http://smoothspan.wordpress.com/2007/09/10/google-apps-can-win-in-the-enterprise-if-they-leverage-the-business-trust-fabric/
Posted by: Bob Warfield | September 10, 2007 8:42 PMGoogle certainly doesn't have the feature-set in comparison to someone like ZOHO.
However Microsoft is certainly scared of Google. Zimbra also came out with a statement against Google. They all realize Google's potential.
Read my post on this:
http://abhishek.tiwari.com/2007/09/10/google-drawing-heat-after-enterprise-market-announcement/
Posted by: Abhishek | September 10, 2007 9:27 PMMS Office's collaboration features outshine Google's. Its complete integration between the whole sweet of products that makes MS Office stand out. Google is more for the small business rather than the enterprise. They have a long way to go.. good start though.
At the pace they are going, expect a MS Office competitor in another 5 years. By then another version of MS Office that will be leaps and bounds ahead of Google. Even though MS Office 2007 is already ahead of its times.
Posted by: Kanwal | September 10, 2007 9:28 PMMaybe I'm biased but you can't really compare Google Apps and MS Office.
I agree with that. Office 2007 is the best thing to come out of Redmond in years. Unlike Vista, it's polished and its advances in UI and features are worth upgrading for. I think with Sharepoint, Live Meeting and eventually Office Live, there won't be *any* collaboration advantage to using Google by the end of '08.
Posted by: Dan Grossman | September 10, 2007 10:53 PM"Google has a history of releasing incomplete products". Hmmm.. That sounds familiar somehow...
Posted by: LittleBoyLost | September 10, 2007 11:55 PMDan Grossman, "Unlike Vista, it's polished and its advances in UI and features are worth upgrading for."
Jens Harris, one of the guys behind the Ribbon interface makes it very clear that it's a dumb-down interface. If you are an Office user, this new interface goes against you. For instance, you keep switching Ribbon tabs, means additional clicks, whereas before you could have your set of toolbars all available any time.
Another is that the interface rescrambles itself as you resize the window. Again, the place, shape, and size of buttons and controls change. I don't think having to relearn the interface just because you are resizing the window is a good thing.
This is what you call a progress?
Posted by: Stef | September 11, 2007 12:33 AMI'm no big fan of Microsoft, I'm a huge fan of Gmail but the rest of the Google Office apps seem very half baked. I'd agree with a number of Microsoft's criticisms, even if they're done in the spirit of good ole FUD.
Could Google's Apps threaten Microsoft significantly? Yes. Are they up to the task yet? No.
- They miss the basic features that MS pointed out
- If you do need the advanced features that MS Office and others have from time to time, you're out of luck.
- They don't seem to integrate with eachother.
- No GUI consistency - Gmail, Writely and the spreadsheet app (I forget it's name) look significantly different from each-other, Gmail uses labels, Writely uses folders etc. etc.
- They're in perpetual beta - I don't mind using Gmail for my personal email, but I wouldn't want to use products that are in beta for business uses...
It's clear that the web office will be increasingly important - but if in using it via Google, I seem to be headed back to the early 90's in term of functionality, count me out for the moment!
Posted by: Si | September 11, 2007 1:05 AMI don't see that many enterprise's will go down this route.
There are not just software costs but there are also training costs and the cost of retooling the bespoke systems to work with it.
Also there are a number of collaboration platforms out there for enterprise which are fairly mature so document collaboration is not a valid reason for google's offering.
I think its about 3 years to early at the moment. I think when enterprise is ready for this MS will have entered the market with the online office offering which will match the offline version.
If it was all down to cost then linux and open office would be on every business computer currently.
I am a open office user and think this would be an easier product replacement than google.
Posted by: Darren | September 11, 2007 1:07 AMI've got 10 reasons whey Microsoft's 10 reasons suck: http://ariejan.net/2007/09/11/why-10-reasons-why-microsofts-10-reasons-not-to-use-google-apps-suck/
Posted by: Ariejan de Vroom | September 11, 2007 2:08 AMThe person composing this "email" must not have used Microsoft Word or something similar to spell / grammar check it. Either that, or Word is just horrible for such a purpose in the first place.
Posted by: Cosmos Pneumas | September 11, 2007 5:06 AMIt's all a matter of time. With this new alliance Google has a test-development user group. Why make a product then take it to customers when you can bring the customer with you. Things are done differently now, and the Google way is working - expansion and alternatives - that's the dynamic. MFST is in desperate need of new dynamic. They are not leading anything now, old competition is not how to move forward. Innovation with COLLABORATION is.
Posted by: Macthusiast | September 11, 2007 6:08 AMHow about Top 20 Reasons Why Web Apps are Superior to Desktop apps ? Microsoft is clearly trying to compare 1st generation web apps with their evolved suite of products. It's still early days - and they should be scared...
Posted by: Vinny Lingham | September 11, 2007 6:12 AMMicrosoft, running scared and spittin' FUD. Funny.
Posted by: Todd | September 11, 2007 6:23 AMI think I agree with MS - I have trusted Google Apps over MS Office...
They have never shown any confidence in their product as they have always released their product with Beta Tag and thats the reason we can't trust them blindly...
Posted by: Sourav | September 11, 2007 7:18 AMUm, wow. Someone certainly has their knickers in a twist, huh?!
The obvious point missed isn't about "enterprise applications," but about being or not being a Web-native company, much to the point of collaboration. The whole version argument just doesn't fly in the Web world where everything is in beta, all the time. Dynamism is a key advantage Google has over MS -- the former isn't locked into the hard development / release cycles in reality or perception of the latter.
Oh, and this isn't to mention that it was MSFT who essentially birthed the idea of "beta" in the first place.
Run, Forest! Run!
Posted by: Michael | September 11, 2007 8:17 AMInstead of criticising other company's products (defensive) why don't Microsoft champion their own (offensive)?
The transfer of apps to the web is happening, instead of saying why it will not work, why doesn't Microsoft be the first to make it work at enterprise level?
Come on Microsoft, you can do a little better surely?
Posted by: ScribbleSheet | September 11, 2007 8:58 AMI agree that we are still in the early stages of web-based apps and putting them online simply for the sake of having them online isn't the silver bullet. Enterprises ingrained in the office suite are not going to give it up for Google apps. In the coming years, users are going to flock to what works best for them which is something they weren't able to do in the past. Some will stay on Office, some will only do Google, and some will do both. The silver bullet is the flow of information between these apps, regardless of who makes them.
Number 9 is an interesting one because not only do I agree that people only use 10% of the features in productivity applications but I think how they use those features is a mess. It works differently for everyone. One person's use of a feature can impact the productivity other people involved. That's a problem with apps - online and off.
What's more compelling to me is 1) the fact that better experiences are being created in the browser 2)information is more easily flowing in and out of tools and 3) that the offline capabilities of browser based apps are emerging.
Posted by: Matt | September 11, 2007 9:27 AMGoogle Docs needs some better Copy n Paste support between itself and the Desktop.
Posted by: Vinod | September 11, 2007 10:33 AMGoogle Apps main strength is "Collaboration". I completely agree. Just because i can collaborate, doesn't mean that i am wiling to put up with a lame GUI. Browser based applications can never be as rich as desktop apps. Its improving, but it will never catch up fully.
I still think Google Apps is not a complete product. Especially Google Spreadsheets lags far behind Excel.
Posted by: Aravin | September 11, 2007 10:44 AMI don't see why MS are so worried about Google Apps.
Think Free Office is almost an Office 2003 clone (word/ppoint/excel) and it runs in a web browser!
Posted by: Marc | September 11, 2007 1:55 PMZOHO apps a lot better than Google Apps.
The Google Docs&Spreadsheet set is a joke. Page Creator is a bunch of useless stuff.
Google is dead.
Posted by: Terry | September 11, 2007 5:15 PMYou nailed it with "collaboration." Say you draft a document and want a few coworkers to take a look at it and make a simple change or two . . . with Microsoft Word . . . um, yeah.
Posted by: Ed Kohler | September 11, 2007 8:12 PMI use google apps now. Trust me, MS has no reason to be concerned. Google Apps is flaky and there 99.9% uptime is a lie. When I get a chance I will be switching to something else.
Posted by: Andy | September 11, 2007 9:23 PMNow i have the strong feeling to use Google Apps, because these 10 points has opened the doors to correct the so called defectiveness what M$ finds for the enterprise customers. Google will defenetly give reply to these unscrupulous points.
Posted by: Shivaram | September 12, 2007 12:14 AMUse the following Products..
Open office instead of MS Office
Mozilla ThunderBird instead of MS Outlook
Firefox instead of Internet Explorer.
Posted by: kvins | September 12, 2007 1:43 AMThe letter was probably written by somebody who works for Google...
Posted by: Danyal | September 12, 2007 3:54 AMCollaboration? It's called file sharing folks. How do you think google apps works? You store the file in one location, and other people access it.
If we are talking enterprise level, just make a drive for file-sharing on the server, map the network drive and there, collaboration.
Really, Google apps is not enterprise level. What it is good for is all the small and medium sized businesses that don't want to continually shell out for microsoft licenses.
Posted by: DB | September 12, 2007 6:08 AMUse the right tool for the right job. Some cases MS Office is better, others Google is better. Depends on your requirements & objectives, just like all other technology decisions.
Posted by: unknown | September 12, 2007 7:39 AMI've got to agree with the point that Eric made in the comments. While this list does raise some good/valid criticisms, it comes off as whiny, and overly defensive.
From the tone of this letter, it's fairly obvious that Microsoft is afraid of Google Apps. That alone gives Google some credibility. If their applications are so terrible, why is Microsoft so afraid?
Having said that, I tend to agree with a lot of the points raised in the note.
Posted by: Adam Snider | September 12, 2007 7:57 AMCollaboration ?
-> SharePoint 2007 and Office 2007 go together like bread and butter.
Google "enterprise" penetration? There is no chance for it any time soon and everyone who actually works for enterprise knows this.
I think if they are going to penetrate anything it will be small business (mom\pop). But even there Office Live will steamroll anything Google can offer.
Posted by: Victor Shamanovsky | September 12, 2007 10:16 AMYeah, look, most big biz won't move to Google Apps b/c the move is just too huge. Most of the Google stuff is first-gen and not yet ready for the full enterprise environment.
Of course, this post does have a few glaring mistakes:
while Google can store a lot of data for enterprises on Google servers, there is no easy to use, automated way for enterprises to regularly delete data, issue a legal hold for specific docs or bring copies into the corp
This can of course be mitigated by deploying Google Apps to your own server, which is clearly what Enterprise will want to do. And if you've ever dealt with Microsoft's "Office Support", it being 24 hours is not really an accurate way to look at it.
releasing incomplete products, calling them beta software, Pot meet Kettle, at least Google has the honesty to call them Beta. What's more Google typically releases updated to their Beta sites first, which means that updated Google Apps code has definitely seen use.
Google controlling when and if they rollout specific features and functionality, customers have minimal if any control over the timing of product rollouts and features. Obviously incorrect information, Google can't roll out updates to your servers unless you let them.
Look, Google apps are not yet "up to snuff" for the Office side. GMail is excellent and I love Calendar, but that's not totally replacing my Outlook yet (needs Contacts). However the word processor and spreadsheet are ages behind Word and Excel, they're just barely adequate for small business. And there's no real contest against say Publisher or OneNote. The Google Notes can't really reproduce OneNote, b/c of some very difficult features to match in a web environment.
So yeah, classic FUD, of course it's pretty obvious from the board response that we're not really biting.
Posted by: Gates VP | September 12, 2007 4:07 PM