If there is one company whose entire business is based on
software services delivered via the internet, it is Google. Through
its online applications, supported by online advertising, Google is
changing how people approach software.
Simply by releasing beta code to an internet browser, Google is
mounting a serious challenge to Microsoft's dominance of desktop
applications and operating systems, if some IT commentators are to
believed.
In the first week in September, with the launch of the early
code of
Google's Chrome, US commentators have spotted that the new
browsers will encourage people to use applications direct from the
internet, or other IP networks, and bypass the desktop OS and
applications - Microsoft's cash cow and the most common corporate
interface and productivity tool.
"Chrome is nothing less than a full on desktop operating system
that will compete head on with Windows,"
according to TechCrunch blogger Michael Arrington.
Potentially, users could boot straight into a browsers and never
be aware of any underlying OS on the local machine.
Google says Chrome will include an improved Java-Script engine
and Google Gears, which will let users store and access web
applications off-line. If it lives up to its promise, web 2.0
applications, such as searchable maps and online applications, will
enjoy greatly improved stability and performance. It will also be
open source, so other browser makers can use its technology and
applications builders can adapt to it.
But is corporate IT really ready to ditch the Microsoft
technologies that office workers and IT support teams in their
millions are so used to working with?
David Mitchell, senior vice-president of IT research at Ovum
says, "Chrome is more of a threat to Windows than to Firefox or
Internet Explorer. Google talks about launching apps and managing
them, protecting them from crashing within the browser, stop apps
from writing to the desktop and corrupting the disk. These are
things that you would normally see an operating system do."
Google has subtly made its intentions clear. In its
blog it promised Chrome would be more than the browser we know.
"What we really needed was not just a browser, but also a modern
platform for web pages and applications, and that is what we set
out to build," the blog read.
But we have been hear before. Sun and Oracle famously tried, and
failed, to usurp Microsoft's dominance on the desktop with the
network computer. From 1996 to 2000, they appealed to businesses
hit by the rising costs of supporting vast networks of PC, with
helpdesk staff having to physically maintain complex remote device.
The Network Computer collaboration envisaged a world where
application processing was done at the server, where it was easier
to maintain and control. Only a diskless, easy to maintain device,
running lightweight operating systems, and a screen, would sit on a
user's desk.
The idea never took off because PCs fell dramatically in price
and manufacturers became better at creating "standard builds" that
were easier to maintain. Microsoft also improved its remote support
protocols so fewer visits to the user were necessary and companies
such as Citrix, and eventually Microsoft itself, allowed PC users
to access server-based applications. The advantage of the Network
Computer fell away and the idea was canned in 2000.
Google's concept of internet-based applications is not entirely
dissimilar to the Network Computer vision - although applications
are more distributed in a server "cloud" rather than running on a
specific in-house machine.
Is there any reason to believe that Google can succeed where the
might of Sun and Oracle combined has already failed?
David Armstrong, product marketing manager for Google
Enterprise, says he sees the parallels between the two situations,
but this time huge number of people are already accustomed to
online, browser-based applications such as e-mail and
photo-sharing. That familiarity could lead to acceptance in the
corporate market, he said.
According to Gartner, Google Apps already has a surprising
degree of penetration in business - 33% of business staff use some
form of Google Apps - but this is as a secondary application,
supplementing, not replacing, Microsoft Office.
But some companies are already convinced by Google approach to
productivity applications. Building firm Taylor Woodrow has moved
1,800 employees to Google Apps, including Google Mail, Google Docs
and Google Calendar. The products are all hosted and managed by
Google, removing the need to install any software or hardware on
site.
Taylor Woodrow's director of IT, Rob Ramsay, says the
architecture suited his mobile workforce at construction sites and
client premises. "The mobility coupled with the speed of roll-out,
the lack of requirement for a physical infrastructure and the pace
of new product development is very beneficial," he says.
So are the savings. The business has seen costs fall by around
£1m because of the hosted nature of the technology and the fact
that telephone, e-mail and web support is included in the package,
he says.
In this way, Google does have more chance of usurping Microsoft
than earlier efforts, Mitchell says. But inertia among IT
departments, in terms of their technology investment and skill
sets, will prevent most IT leaders from making a rapid move, he
says. "If you are looking for a CIO who will make a major change in
platform away from Office or Windows, the demographic will be two
years from retirement. You can lose many friends with that kind of
decision, and your job could be threatened by it. The ones who do
it will be the ones who do not care about that."
Although, in the future, applications may be presented in the
browser, and hosted in "the cloud", they will create a demand for a
lightweight operating systems. Microsoft may well be the most
likely to provide them, Mitchell says. "I can see Microsoft
offering a 'Windows Skinny' operating system, just to launch a
browser where the applications run. Microsoft has a really good
record of denying a trend and then saying it was a mistake,
catching up and being really successful. It denied the internet and
then made a huge success of it."
In the end, Mitchell believes there is a limit to the software
as a service model because suppliers have yet to find a profitable
business model to accelerate development, while users are still
wary of relinquishing control of their architecture.
"One of the biggest responsibilities of the CIO is to design the
corporate architecture and align it to the business. But with SaaS
they do not get a choice in architecture. A UK company may want its
datacentre in the UK, because of privacy issues, but they will not
get that choice from the SaaS supplier at the moment."
He sees a hybrid model evolving, where established software
firms start to offer their applications as a service, and SaaS
suppliers offer their software to run on in-house systems. Users
should be allowed some flexibility between the architectures,
Mitchell says.
Microsoft sees the model evolving, but is not pushing users onto
a SaaS model, says Tim Kimber, Office Live product manager. Office
Live gives users the collaborative aspects of software as a
service, but does not run the application remotely. "Not everyone
wants software as a service over night. We will be there move to
this sort of model as people want to do that," he says.
Regardless of whether, and how quickly, the SaaS model achieves
dominance at the expense of Windows and Office, there will still be
a positive outcome for IT directors, according to Gartner. By 2011,
Microsoft pricing for Microsoft Office, e-mail and collaboration
licensing and services will be constrained by competition from
Google Apps, the research firm says.
Microsoft Live Vs Google Apps
Software as a service
Office Live is not truly software as a service. Documents are
only stored and share online - in the cloud. Application code is
still required to run on the desktop. This is good for working
offline - and then synching documents for collaboration. However,
it does not get away from the downside of running desktop
applications: they are difficult to support, costly to license and
place demands on local storage and power.
Google Apps
Google applications, including word processing, presentation
software and spreadsheets, are all processed off the desktop, so
they take the power and storage burden from that device. This
approach also makes support easier - in fact Google hosts these
applications and, therefore, supports them too. It also make them
"versionless" which means Google upgrades, and patches applications
as it goes along, without interrupting users or burdening IT
departments. It also means IT departments could offer users very
light desktops - with lower memory and processing power - and still
get these applications. Bandwidth and network availability would
need to be assured though.
Functionality
Office Live
The suit still has the functionality of desktop applications.
For example in Word, not only do you have the full range of fonts,
you can embed images and tables, use HTML and XLM code, and offer
complex formatting. They also give as-you-write grammar and spell
checking.
Google Apps
These are very much stripped down applications, including word
processing, spread sheets, presentation, e-mail and calendaring.
Basic word processing is offered, but any more complex formatting
is off the menu. Since observers have commented that much of the
functionality of Microsoft Word goes unused, IT departments may see
them as fit for purpose for many users. More demanding Microsoft
Office users will not get the functionality they need.
File support
Microsoft Office
The legendary headache of IT helpdesks in supporting different
file formats in the 1980s through to the mid 1990s was largely
wiped out as Microsoft Office began to dominate personal
productivity apps and began backward version support.
Google Apps
Google Apps support most major file formats including Microsoft,
Adobe and Star Office.
User Acceptance
Microsoft Office. These applications are so ubiquitous in the
work place they have a high level of acceptance. However, some high
functions of Word and Excel are complex and users require
training.
Google Apps
Although there may be some resistance to working on programs
which are not on the desktop, most people have already used some
form of software as a service application in the form of internet
e-mail. The most basic word processing interface is fairly standard
and intuitive.