Leadership By Numbers :: Office versus Office

Category Open Source

So, a short blog review in NetworkWorld has given a thumbs down to Lotus Symphony. It's all true. Today's Symphony is an unfinished work.

Yet, it's also inevitable that Lotus Symphony is the inflection point that officially marks the decline of Microsoft Office. Microsoft is being challenged by Symphony, which is really one head of a hydra, for it is a product of commercial vendor collusion and free open-source resources. Google, IBM, Sun, and many other firms (and volunteers) have committed their technology to a free, open-source office suite: OpenOffice.

This is not going to be the mano-e-mano smackdown of Firefox against Internet Explorer. The drama is larger than "Office versus Office." We've already seen WordPerfect attempt a resuscitation with a Java release, or IBM/Lotus holding on to WordPro. Those days are gone. One difference with Symphony, is it relies on the conglomeration of OpenOffice code (OpenOffice, Sun's StarOffice, a Macintosh NeoOffice and Google Docs).

Oh, wait, Google Docs isn't directly code related to OpenOffice. Google Docs came through an acquisition of Writely. But, Google Docs so easily mixes with OpenOffice that it feels like it belongs in the same brood. The family resemblance is the Open Document Format that is shared by all these tools. That's the second piece to Symphony's uniqueness--it uses a shared standard in document formatting.

OpenOffice supports the Open Document Format (ODF, the ISO document standard), so any program on any platform can add the capability to read, edit, format, and write to these documents. Recently, a lot has been written about ODF (Bob Sutor is a good source on ODF activities), but the value of ODF is only now being measured. I expect that within a short period of time, more and more "non-Office" programs will begin including ODF capability, just as many programs give the capability to report in PDF.

How long before Microsoft Office is irrelevant? In reading the Redmond Magazine tepid impressions of Office 2007, I'm guessing within a cycle of 18 months. Redmond is an independent trade journal that analyzes and reviews Microsoft solutions and says it like it is:

Microsoft rolled out Office 2007 with huge fanfare last fall. So far, though, most users can only come up with one or two new features they like. For most, those features fall short of convincing them to upgrade to the new version.

The full usage of Office 2007 is realized best only within a Microsoft architecture. Sharepoint, Exchange, and Microsoft Office Communications Server 2007 create a beautiful context for Office 2007. It can be impressive. It will be expensive.

There are no deployment limitations to OpenOffice or ODF. Development costs are shared, distribution overhead is maintained through web sites, and the intellectual property has no boundaries. For the next two years, I can pretty much guess where I'm going to see Office 2007 in use. I have absolutely no idea what to expect for OpenOffice and ODF. Lotus Symphony is just one ship in a flotilla and the exploration on the open ocean will be vast.

Comments

3 - I certainly see the value in ODF. But getting the decision makers to see that value is proving - - challenging. They have been told or have read that "free" and "open source" is somehow bad or suspect. "Where will we get support?" is the first question. Having IBM put their stamp on ODF is a good start. Having some people test it and use in a corporate setting is better. Having those people to praise it is even better.

I know that not everyone will automatically get ODF tools, and that is fine. But for the majority, the vast majority, it will be all that they need.

Now, if we can get IBM and Lotus to do their presentations in Symphony, that would speak volumes.

Posted by Gregg Eldred At 04:52:20 AM On 10/25/2007 | - Website - |

2 - Oh, I was being somewhat rhetorical. Blog entries are so small that I don't really want to explain everything, but I try instead for big-brush portrayals. That said, I actually like Symphony, but it's beta and I think it's safe to say that IBM knew it wasn't fully polished. If a reviewer faults Symphony, well, sure, it's incomplete.

I do think that it marks the end of Microsoft Office. And, not just because it's the latest and greatest Office alternative--but because there is a web of alternatives that share the same codebase and/or use the same document format.

I'm thinking big picture here, pulling away from the spreadsheet grid of matching feature between suites. There is a movement of forces behind Symphony which is very dramatic. For instance, I could have spoken about the Eclipse framework. This is a fun time to be in the industry.

Posted by jack dausman At 08:22:53 PM On 10/20/2007 | - Website - |

1 - If I was to judge the review, I would probably not start out with "it's all true".

This single quote

"In functionality, the suites are OK if rudimentary documents are all that need to be created. For which I ask, why not use the (free) included WordPad applet in each and every copy of Microsoft Windows?"

indicates to me, that the author is not a reviewer, but just a lobbyist. Some might still argue that Open/StarOffice is missing features they absolutely need in MS Office, but comparing it with WordPad ... well, says it all.

Posted by Fabian Robok At 05:27:34 PM On 10/20/2007 | - Website - |