iTunes isn't a browser, but it bugs me to install one.
That is the Apple Software Update app, not iTunes. It monitors versions of iTunes, QuickTime and Safari.
Quote:
And shows you helpful ads based on the data within your work!
That is usually how things work with for-profit companies when services are free. If you want ad-free then there is Google Doc?s paid service. Apple will also be releasing it?s iWork.com as an ad-free paid service.
I am not a big Office, Google Doc user; how does iWorks.com compare? MS's monopoly makes it hard for other apps to take hold. Linux desktop, being FREE of Charge, hasnt help it to increase it user base very much over the last decade.
The desktop will likely be fragmented for many years between Flash, AJAX, and Silverlight. But on the mobile device AJAX is clearly going to win the dominant position.
One possible scenario, over the next couple of years its expected that consumers will connect to the internet using mobile devices just as much if not more than using computers. It's likely web developers would prefer to code for one runtime rather than coding for several different runtimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
If MS is spending the extra time and money to make Office for the web standards compliant then their is another revenue stream that they are trying to tap. I went to the site to check it out but it required Silverlight to be installed so I went no further. Is this going to require Silverlight or, even worse, work primarily through Silverlight?
If so, great; anything that pulls at Adobe?s proprietary Flash dominance is a good thing for AJAX and HTML5.
Microsoft by going online is admitting that they are losing business. That is a fact. Microsoft built their business on copying other companies. Microsoft never innovated any technology field, rather they copy, steal, buy and intimidate anyone who is making money out of anything.
Google does not need this market to stay in business. Microsoft does. If this is implemented, retailers of other Microsoft softwares will want more concessions from Microsoft resulting in lower profit for the software titan.
Pro- or anti-MS has nothing to do with the reality that MS is out to make money. Part of their business model is to offer services that pull people toward their other products. Historically that has meant trying to keep users on Windows. There is nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with wondering what MS? angle is.
f MS is spending the extra time and money to make Office for the web standards compliant then their is another revenue stream that they are trying to tap. I went to the site to check it out but it required Silverlight to be installed so I went no further. Is this going to require Silverlight or, even worse, work primarily through Silverlight?
If so, great; anything that pulls at Adobe?s proprietary Flash dominance is a good thing for AJAX and HTML5.
I think they said that most of the site is made with ajax and most things can be done without a plugin but certain features require silverlight.
So if understand this correctly it will be ad supported and free if you buy certain office suites. Not a bad move by microsoft as a lot people will use this over google docs as it seems to offer more features and the biggest advantage is that it will handle office documents better(which is still the standard).
I think they said that most of the site is made with ajax and most things can be done without a plugin but certain features require silverlight.
That is a huge step for MS and it means that they will have to make IE standards compliant to make it easy on themselves if they plan to support also support FF, Safari and, by extension of WebKit, Chrome browsers.
We already have office 2012, it's called iWork 09.
In all seriousness, if Apple can get it's act together on a more advance spreadsheet application then iWork would take the cake. Working in Pages & Keynote makes Word & PowerPoint seem archaic.
So true. I use Keynote all the time and I always have people coming up to me after the lecture asking how I did all that with PowerPoint. After explaining to them about Keynote, they really $#it themselves when they learn that they get all 3 apps in iWork for $79.
plus for google; this is surely generating free publicity for google docs!
as for M$, they're really playing catch-up now. a lot of people will use this due to blind obedience to M$, or ignorance of their options, but this sort of thing really clashes with the MS business model. they're still going to dominate for a while, but things have not been going their way for a long time now
Microsoft by going online is admitting that they are losing business. That is a fact. Microsoft built their business on copying other companies. Microsoft never innovated any technology field, rather they copy, steal, buy and intimidate anyone who is making money out of anything.
Google does not need this market to stay in business. Microsoft does. If this is implemented, retailers of other Microsoft softwares will want more concessions from Microsoft resulting in lower profit for the software titan.
In the end, Microsoft will be the looser!
Fact Check.
Google & Microsoft have a larger Market Cap than Apple (as of right now MS is almost double Apple). Apple has 20x billion in Cash. That at this point is there only advantage I can see.
MAC OS Whatever has never and will never be a player in corporate America (world).
Yes, Microsoft does need the market share to keep their dominance in the Software arena only. Apple can chip away for years to come but will never be mainstream in corporate America (world). MS will have the Server arena for corporate for many years to come.
Too many legacy apps written with VB that communicate with the Mainframes to make sense to convert (especially on a platform that has never been proven on corporate networks that have multiple operating systems).
SQL is a part of FileMaker (in a very bad way and band-aid at best) and every other desktop DB that communicates with SQL servers. Apple has never made this work smoothy or safely for IT to approve. Apple has no corporate DB and currently is making their software compatible with SQL and Exchange. In my opinion that means they have no plan.
Google needs the market share to continue to catch up with Microsoft.
They need Apple for the next couple years. Then you will have MS & Google as your mainstream business choices.
Does anyone in this room ever wonder why Flash is the choice of video on the net except for Apple and Linux. Because it runs like butter as smooth as can be on a Windows OS.
Google has partnered with Intel and Adobe for their OS.
From the consumer point. Google will rule the netbook arena because of price.
Microsoft on Monday announced plans to begin widespread testing of a new version of its market-leading productivity suite for Windows PCs that will tie into a series of new Web-based Office applications similar to those offered by rival Google.
Presenting at its Worldwide Partner Conference 2009, the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant said it will soon invite tens of thousands of customers to start testing Microsoft Office 2010, which features broadcast and video editing in PowerPoint, new data visualization capabilities in Excel, and co-authoring in Word.
As part of the announcement, Microsoft also said it plans to take Office online, with a new series of free Office Web applications aimed at combating the encroachment on its space by arch rival Google, whose online document and spreadsheet applications have been growing in popularity.
The ad-supported web suite will reportedly be available to more than 400 million Windows Live consumers at no cost. It will also be accessible on-premises for all Office volume licensing customers and via Microsoft Online Services, where customers will be able to purchase a subscription as part of a hosted offering.
"Office Web Applications, the online companion to Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote applications, allow you to access documents from anywhere. You can even simultaneously share and work on documents with others online," Microsoft says on its Office 2010 Technical Preview site. "View documents across PCs, mobile phones, and the Web without compromising document fidelity. Create new documents and do basic editing using the familiar Office interface."
Microsoft, which also announced that it is streamlining the number of Office editions from eight to five, said customers will be able to purchase the new suite sometime in the first half of next year. The company made no announcements related to future versions of Office for the Mac, which will more than likely also tie into the new Web-based suite once it materializes.
The super mega patched MicroShit Office suite is not a suitable online tool. All that it is expected to do is to increase the online traffic so much the servers will be shut down within days of introduction.
No one can compete with Microsoft in the office apps space. It's one thing to defeat IE as it is a crap product and not too hard to learn a new browser, but Office is a whole 'nother matter.
It's maybe hard to lean another product as complex and cumbersome as Microsoft's office suite.
But the point is that software like iWork is intuitive and easy to learn. Web apps could be like that.
And although Google isn't a topnotch software company like Apple, I think they improve steadily and have the right intentions.
Google & Microsoft have a larger Market Cap than Apple (as of right now MS is almost double Apple). Apple has 20x billion in Cash. That at this point is there only advantage I can see.
Ha ha, maybe you need (new) glasses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPhone1982
MAC OS Whatever has never and will never be a player in corporate America (world).
Your missing the point completely, Mac OS X is also Unix. And (another fact) Unix has entered the corporate world in a big way (via Linux and several flavors of BSD). So 'Apple' has excellent SQL and web servers.
Microsoft is afraid that something other than Office might get popular if it's free .... damage control!
After all, that is how Microsoft eliminated the competition. They gave it away free to get a large user base, and of course all competitors nearly ceased to be. Is it free now? Huh!
Office is ingrained as a standard by shear number of users. It was never because it was better. There is some advantage by everyone using common a common format, no doubt, but I'd love to see Google or OpenOffice just plain make a better product and challenge Microsoft.
Maybe we will a have a Common Business Document format in the future that everyone will follow instead of following MS.
This is similar to how they nearly gave Windows XP away on netbooks ($15) for fear a large Linux user base would develop. That probably would not happen anyway, but fear seems to rule in Redmond these days.
MAC OS Whatever has never and will never be a player in corporate America (world).
That last is not a fact, it is an opinion, as I am pretty sure you are not prescient. Apple doesn't seem to try to hard to compete in business, true. They hardly try to sell them that way. "PC" is always wearing a suit in the commercials.
Servers do not have to be Windows based. BSD and Linux have been cutting into that business for quite some time. Mac Minis are very popular as servers.
Microsoft DID gain control of software for business by first giving it away for free, crushing the competition.
Very big companies have a lot of momentum and resist change very strongly. They will probably continue to use MS for quite some time. Competition will happen though. Microsoft is opening the door with the poor quality stuff they put out.
My own company pays 3 times what I'd pay on the street for a Dell with Windows for "service."
That last is not a fact, it is an opinion, as I am pretty sure you are not prescient. Apple doesn't seem to try to hard to compete in business, true. They hardly try to sell them that way. "PC" is always wearing a suit in the commercials.
A lot of what iPhone1982 stated is not fact but with Apple?s current business model it will be impossible for Apple to sell PCs to the majority of corporations if they maintain their current models.
On one front, since Apple is the HW and OS vendor, even if their corporate infrastructure was completely browser-based that would still be two different OSes that would need to be supported or at least a *new* OS that needs to be supported. They are likely still going to have Windows servers on the backend.
On another front, corporations can weigh the pros and cons of different vendors and get them to compete with each other while still getting the same OS installation, regardless. This is not true when you go with OS X. Unless Apple licenses their OS, which is highly unlikely since they didn?t do it back in the mid 90s when they really were suffering and could have used the leg up from contracts with the major vendors, there is just no way that a large corporation would go with Apple for their entire setup. It?s cost prohibitive on many levels.
On yet another front, Apple likes to reduce legacy code whenever it can. This can be an issue for a corporation that wants to maintain their current setup. It?s easy to say that they can just not upgrade their OS to the next version, but new machines often come with new HW requiring new drivers that a company trying to run, say Tiger, wouldn?t be able to do on a new Mac. Apple would have to then offer legacy support and testing for older OSes on new HW. Something they don?t seem to want to do.
I think Macs will be consumer-focused for the foreseeable future. The iPhone, on the other hand, is very user-agnostic in many ways and looks to be making some powerful inroads, though Mail still needs some work to be a true competitor to BB OS?es mail app.
Comments
iTunes isn't a browser, but it bugs me to install one.
That is the Apple Software Update app, not iTunes. It monitors versions of iTunes, QuickTime and Safari.
And shows you helpful ads based on the data within your work!
That is usually how things work with for-profit companies when services are free. If you want ad-free then there is Google Doc?s paid service. Apple will also be releasing it?s iWork.com as an ad-free paid service.
One possible scenario, over the next couple of years its expected that consumers will connect to the internet using mobile devices just as much if not more than using computers. It's likely web developers would prefer to code for one runtime rather than coding for several different runtimes.
If MS is spending the extra time and money to make Office for the web standards compliant then their is another revenue stream that they are trying to tap. I went to the site to check it out but it required Silverlight to be installed so I went no further. Is this going to require Silverlight or, even worse, work primarily through Silverlight?
If so, great; anything that pulls at Adobe?s proprietary Flash dominance is a good thing for AJAX and HTML5.
Google does not need this market to stay in business. Microsoft does. If this is implemented, retailers of other Microsoft softwares will want more concessions from Microsoft resulting in lower profit for the software titan.
In the end, Microsoft will be the looser!
Pro- or anti-MS has nothing to do with the reality that MS is out to make money. Part of their business model is to offer services that pull people toward their other products. Historically that has meant trying to keep users on Windows. There is nothing wrong with that, just as there is nothing wrong with wondering what MS? angle is.
f MS is spending the extra time and money to make Office for the web standards compliant then their is another revenue stream that they are trying to tap. I went to the site to check it out but it required Silverlight to be installed so I went no further. Is this going to require Silverlight or, even worse, work primarily through Silverlight?
If so, great; anything that pulls at Adobe?s proprietary Flash dominance is a good thing for AJAX and HTML5.
I think they said that most of the site is made with ajax and most things can be done without a plugin but certain features require silverlight.
So if understand this correctly it will be ad supported and free if you buy certain office suites. Not a bad move by microsoft as a lot people will use this over google docs as it seems to offer more features and the biggest advantage is that it will handle office documents better(which is still the standard).
I think they said that most of the site is made with ajax and most things can be done without a plugin but certain features require silverlight.
That is a huge step for MS and it means that they will have to make IE standards compliant to make it easy on themselves if they plan to support also support FF, Safari and, by extension of WebKit, Chrome browsers.
We already have office 2012, it's called iWork 09.
In all seriousness, if Apple can get it's act together on a more advance spreadsheet application then iWork would take the cake. Working in Pages & Keynote makes Word & PowerPoint seem archaic.
So true. I use Keynote all the time and I always have people coming up to me after the lecture asking how I did all that with PowerPoint. After explaining to them about Keynote, they really $#it themselves when they learn that they get all 3 apps in iWork for $79.
Oh, yeah. Right. Any of you Redmond types tried Office for Mac lately??
No, I didn't think so.
"Fidelity" stops with "PCs".
As in "real PCs running Windows"
As in "Macs aren't PCs". Even if you paid a lot more for Office than you would have on a Windows PC.
as for M$, they're really playing catch-up now. a lot of people will use this due to blind obedience to M$, or ignorance of their options, but this sort of thing really clashes with the MS business model. they're still going to dominate for a while, but things have not been going their way for a long time now
Microsoft by going online is admitting that they are losing business. That is a fact. Microsoft built their business on copying other companies. Microsoft never innovated any technology field, rather they copy, steal, buy and intimidate anyone who is making money out of anything.
Google does not need this market to stay in business. Microsoft does. If this is implemented, retailers of other Microsoft softwares will want more concessions from Microsoft resulting in lower profit for the software titan.
In the end, Microsoft will be the looser!
Fact Check.
Google & Microsoft have a larger Market Cap than Apple (as of right now MS is almost double Apple). Apple has 20x billion in Cash. That at this point is there only advantage I can see.
MAC OS Whatever has never and will never be a player in corporate America (world).
Yes, Microsoft does need the market share to keep their dominance in the Software arena only. Apple can chip away for years to come but will never be mainstream in corporate America (world). MS will have the Server arena for corporate for many years to come.
Too many legacy apps written with VB that communicate with the Mainframes to make sense to convert (especially on a platform that has never been proven on corporate networks that have multiple operating systems).
SQL is a part of FileMaker (in a very bad way and band-aid at best) and every other desktop DB that communicates with SQL servers. Apple has never made this work smoothy or safely for IT to approve. Apple has no corporate DB and currently is making their software compatible with SQL and Exchange. In my opinion that means they have no plan.
Google needs the market share to continue to catch up with Microsoft.
They need Apple for the next couple years. Then you will have MS & Google as your mainstream business choices.
Does anyone in this room ever wonder why Flash is the choice of video on the net except for Apple and Linux. Because it runs like butter as smooth as can be on a Windows OS.
Google has partnered with Intel and Adobe for their OS.
From the consumer point. Google will rule the netbook arena because of price.
Microsoft on Monday announced plans to begin widespread testing of a new version of its market-leading productivity suite for Windows PCs that will tie into a series of new Web-based Office applications similar to those offered by rival Google.
Presenting at its Worldwide Partner Conference 2009, the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant said it will soon invite tens of thousands of customers to start testing Microsoft Office 2010, which features broadcast and video editing in PowerPoint, new data visualization capabilities in Excel, and co-authoring in Word.
As part of the announcement, Microsoft also said it plans to take Office online, with a new series of free Office Web applications aimed at combating the encroachment on its space by arch rival Google, whose online document and spreadsheet applications have been growing in popularity.
The ad-supported web suite will reportedly be available to more than 400 million Windows Live consumers at no cost. It will also be accessible on-premises for all Office volume licensing customers and via Microsoft Online Services, where customers will be able to purchase a subscription as part of a hosted offering.
"Office Web Applications, the online companion to Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote applications, allow you to access documents from anywhere. You can even simultaneously share and work on documents with others online," Microsoft says on its Office 2010 Technical Preview site. "View documents across PCs, mobile phones, and the Web without compromising document fidelity. Create new documents and do basic editing using the familiar Office interface."
Microsoft, which also announced that it is streamlining the number of Office editions from eight to five, said customers will be able to purchase the new suite sometime in the first half of next year. The company made no announcements related to future versions of Office for the Mac, which will more than likely also tie into the new Web-based suite once it materializes.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
The super mega patched MicroShit Office suite is not a suitable online tool. All that it is expected to do is to increase the online traffic so much the servers will be shut down within days of introduction.
No one can compete with Microsoft in the office apps space. It's one thing to defeat IE as it is a crap product and not too hard to learn a new browser, but Office is a whole 'nother matter.
It's maybe hard to lean another product as complex and cumbersome as Microsoft's office suite.
But the point is that software like iWork is intuitive and easy to learn. Web apps could be like that.
And although Google isn't a topnotch software company like Apple, I think they improve steadily and have the right intentions.
Fact Check.
Google & Microsoft have a larger Market Cap than Apple (as of right now MS is almost double Apple). Apple has 20x billion in Cash. That at this point is there only advantage I can see.
Ha ha, maybe you need (new) glasses.
MAC OS Whatever has never and will never be a player in corporate America (world).
Your missing the point completely, Mac OS X is also Unix. And (another fact) Unix has entered the corporate world in a big way (via Linux and several flavors of BSD). So 'Apple' has excellent SQL and web servers.
After all, that is how Microsoft eliminated the competition. They gave it away free to get a large user base, and of course all competitors nearly ceased to be. Is it free now? Huh!
Office is ingrained as a standard by shear number of users. It was never because it was better. There is some advantage by everyone using common a common format, no doubt, but I'd love to see Google or OpenOffice just plain make a better product and challenge Microsoft.
Maybe we will a have a Common Business Document format in the future that everyone will follow instead of following MS.
This is similar to how they nearly gave Windows XP away on netbooks ($15) for fear a large Linux user base would develop. That probably would not happen anyway, but fear seems to rule in Redmond these days.
Fact Check.
MAC OS Whatever has never and will never be a player in corporate America (world).
That last is not a fact, it is an opinion, as I am pretty sure you are not prescient. Apple doesn't seem to try to hard to compete in business, true. They hardly try to sell them that way. "PC" is always wearing a suit in the commercials.
Servers do not have to be Windows based. BSD and Linux have been cutting into that business for quite some time. Mac Minis are very popular as servers.
Microsoft DID gain control of software for business by first giving it away for free, crushing the competition.
Very big companies have a lot of momentum and resist change very strongly. They will probably continue to use MS for quite some time. Competition will happen though. Microsoft is opening the door with the poor quality stuff they put out.
My own company pays 3 times what I'd pay on the street for a Dell with Windows for "service."
...
My own company pays 3 times what I'd pay on the street for a Dell with Windows for "service."
You need a new purchasing department at your company. I got an 18% corporate discount on my Dell XPS 1530 for my personal use.
That last is not a fact, it is an opinion, as I am pretty sure you are not prescient. Apple doesn't seem to try to hard to compete in business, true. They hardly try to sell them that way. "PC" is always wearing a suit in the commercials.
A lot of what iPhone1982 stated is not fact but with Apple?s current business model it will be impossible for Apple to sell PCs to the majority of corporations if they maintain their current models.
On one front, since Apple is the HW and OS vendor, even if their corporate infrastructure was completely browser-based that would still be two different OSes that would need to be supported or at least a *new* OS that needs to be supported. They are likely still going to have Windows servers on the backend.
On another front, corporations can weigh the pros and cons of different vendors and get them to compete with each other while still getting the same OS installation, regardless. This is not true when you go with OS X. Unless Apple licenses their OS, which is highly unlikely since they didn?t do it back in the mid 90s when they really were suffering and could have used the leg up from contracts with the major vendors, there is just no way that a large corporation would go with Apple for their entire setup. It?s cost prohibitive on many levels.
On yet another front, Apple likes to reduce legacy code whenever it can. This can be an issue for a corporation that wants to maintain their current setup. It?s easy to say that they can just not upgrade their OS to the next version, but new machines often come with new HW requiring new drivers that a company trying to run, say Tiger, wouldn?t be able to do on a new Mac. Apple would have to then offer legacy support and testing for older OSes on new HW. Something they don?t seem to want to do.
I think Macs will be consumer-focused for the foreseeable future. The iPhone, on the other hand, is very user-agnostic in many ways and looks to be making some powerful inroads, though Mail still needs some work to be a true competitor to BB OS?es mail app.